>>2270954 (lb)

You failed to take into account Judge O'Scannlain's opinion in Peruta v. San Diego. He did the same textual analysis, came to the same conclusion before the panel opinion was vacated, case reheard en banc and the court held that there is no right to CONCEALED carry. It said nothing about open carry. He notes this in the opinion. Ikuta is also a reliable 2A vote. Clifton is a fucking flaming liberal. He was on the first Trump v. Hawaii panel for "Travel Ban 1.0" affirming the preliminary injunction.

The only anomaly I see in Duncan v. Becerra is Judge Batts who is a Clinton appointee from NYSD, sitting by designation, is in the majority. In other words, they don't have enough circuit judges so have to fly them in from district courts. Judge Smith was in dissent in Peruta (see above).

Here's what the Ninth Circuit does when this stuff happens. They get one judge to call for a rehearing en banc. If it's 2A (or anything they don't like), they'll get it. The original panel holding will be vacated, new anti-2A holding (secured by a "randomly drawn panel of active judges" in a leftist packed court) will be controlling. There is nothing odd about it. You just need to understand how the Ninth works. They did this with Barry Bonds' conviction. That being said, they're often reversed. It's like SCOTUS grants cases just to reverse them.

Here's the important part. And this is why Kavanaugh needs to be seated. This case, as well as Duncan, will likely be appealed to SCOTUS. Young is great test case for "is carry outside the home protected under the 2A" because the panel said some kind, didn't prescribe the method, but open or concealed, can't practically or actually ban both. The prevailing theory in the legal community is that Kennedy wasn't a reliable 2A vote so the Court would always deny certiorari (the appeal) rather than set bad precedent. Rule of Four. It only takes 4 Justices to hear a case, but why bother when Kennedy is so wishy washy. They punted assault weapons ban cases. Concealed carry. Last 2A opinion was unpublished and spanked the Massachusetts high Court for holding a stun gun to not be protected under the 2A because such a device didn't exist circa 1776.