The stay placed on an injunction baring enforcement of the "sensitive locations" aspect of Californias SB2 has been dissolved. The 9th circuit court of appeals merits panel has not only dissolved the administrative stay but it also denied a stay moving forward, allowing the injunction to be in full effect.
Hey everybody, how's it going? Welcome back to Copper Jacket TV. So, huge breaking news out of the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. I was out in the desert today testing out some new PewDie pews for review. When I got home, I saw this massive news: the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the stay, the administrative stay that was stopping the injunction on sensitive places. So, the stay is gone, the injunction is in. Let's talk about it.
Okay, so let's go and talk about what's going on here because this is a pretty big deal. You don't usually get good news from the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals like this when it comes to Second Amendment-related cases. But if you remember back in December, a federal district court judge, Judge Carney, placed an injunction against enforcement of a majority of the sensitive locations that are listed in SB2. SB2 is California's bruneian response bill. It basically banned carrying just about everywhere in the state of California and also added a bunch of other regulations, rules, and fees. With that injunction, it meant that the status quo can remain in effect. That means that people who were carrying in the same place as before would be able to remain carrying in those same places after the New Year.
The ninth Circuit Court of Appeals motion panel placed an administrative stay against that injunction, meaning that all of those new sensitive places in SB2 would actually go into effect January 1st, and they did. Now, they sent it down to the motions panel, panel sent it down to a merits panel. Now, that merits panel is the one that just overturned that administrative stay and denied California's motion for a stay pending appeal. So basically, the stay is gone, they denied the stay, they overturned the administrative stay. Judge Carney's injunction is now in full effect. That means that if you were able to carry somewhere prior to January 1st, you can carry there again today.
Okay, so let's go and take a look at the court filing right here. Now, this is just filed today, January 6, 2024, and it is in the case of Carolo v. Bon, which is the FPC case, and May v. Bon. Now, we're going to go ahead and just push right to page two to the part that I think is most relevant where it says the administrative stay previously entered gives a docket number is dissolved. So the previous administrative stay is gone. The emergency motion under circuit rule 27-3 for a stay pending appeal and for an interim administrative stay is denied. That's it. The stays are gone. The stays are over pending further order of the Court. Appell's motion for reconsideration or clarification of the Court's order of December 30th, 2023, is denied as moot. The existing brief schedules remain in effect.
Now, we can get into all the legal mumbo-jumbo, talk about the where, the why, and the when, but I don't think anybody really cares about that. I think what people care about is that now they can go and they can leave their house and they can go about their daily life and their business and carry like normal, you know, the way that they should be able to carry without having to see a sign in a window or avoid a specific sidewalk or avoid a specific parking lot or not being able to go into a restaurant because that restaurant just happens to serve some type of alcohol. I mean, that's the whole point of getting your permit was so that you could protect yourself once you leave the home.
But the way that California had it was the moment you left your home, you had to, again, disarm yourself pretty much anywhere else that you went. So it is fantastic to see that the injunction is now in place. It is barring enforcement of the sensitive locations aspect of SB2. Again, that's fantastic. The case continues. That's why they said that there's still some dates to come and, you know, the remaining schedule remains the same following this because the case is still yet to come. It's just that California asked for an emergency stay. They granted them an administrative stay, and then the merits panel was supposed to decide whether or not to actually grant or deny that administrative or the emergency stay. Either way, the stay was denied. Administrative stay was denied. A stay pending appeal, a stay for the rest of the freaking case was denied. So basically, we have an injunction that's going to hold up now until this case is over or something else crazy happens and the ninth circuit plays some more games.
But I think that's fantastic news, so the merits panel has sided with us, and we move on from here, hopefully to completely overturn SB2. Obviously, right now, they're kind of hyper-focused. The FPC and these other cases are kind of hyper-focused on getting rid of the sensitive locations first, and then after that, obviously, the rest of the bill can be contended with because there's a lot going on with SB2. It was a pretty big bill and a very broad bill as well. But I just wanted to share that good news with you. If you're somebody who had a permit in California or you were somebody who was maybe going through the permit process or you were somebody who is up for renewal, just know that your permit is now good to go. It's your permit's good.
I know it's just kind of flying off the cuff here a little bit, but I'm kind of excited. I was not expecting this, to be honest with you. I don't think a lot of other people were either, so that is the breaking news for your Saturday. I want to thank you all very much for watching. If you haven't done so already, please hit that subscribe button, that little bell notification, and a thumbs up as always appreciated. Have a good one.