Laserfiche WebLink
June 25, 2016 ( Volume 10 I Issue 12 Zoning Bulletin <br />may very well be permissible," but finding that "the County ha[d] [thus <br />far] failed to justify the burden it ha[d] placed on the right of law- <br />abiding citizens to purchase guns." Consequently, the Ninth Circuit re- <br />versed the district court's dismissal of Teixeira's Second Amendment <br />claims and remanded for the district court to subject the County <br />Ordinance's 500—foot rule to the proper level of scrutiny. <br />See also: District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 128 S. Ct. <br />2783, 171 L. Ed. 2d 637 (2008). <br />See also: Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684 (7th Cir. 2011). <br />See also: Jackson v. City and County of San Francisco, 746 Fad <br />953 (9th Cir. 2014), cert, denied, 135 S. Ct. 2799, 192 L. Ed. 2d 865 <br />(2015). <br />See also: U.S. v. Chovan, 735 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir. 2013), cert. <br />denied, 135 S. Ct. 187, 190 L. Ed. 2d 146 (2014). <br />Case Note: <br />Teixeira had also brought an Equal Protection Clause claim. The court found <br />that claim was "no more than a [Second] Amendment claim dressed in equal <br />protection clothing' and was "subsumed by, and coextensive with" Teixeira's <br />Second Amendment Claim. <br />Ordinance/Referendum—In. response <br />to a protest petition, a county <br />repeals the protested ordinance <br />which banned marijuana dispensaries <br />Dispensary operators argue that the repeal <br />ordinance was illegal because it also <br />repealed part of the ordinance that <br />authorized marijuana dispensaries <br />Citation: County of Kern v. T. C.E.F., Inc., 246 Cal. App. 4th 301, <br />200 Cal. Rptr. 3d 714 (5th Dist. 2016), review filed, (May 16, 2016) <br />The Fifth U.S. Circuit has jurisdiction over Louisiana, Mississippi, <br />and Texas. <br />CALIFORNIA (04/05/16) This case addressed the referendum <br />6 ©2016 Thomson Reuters <br />