Skip to main content

Cases compared

Jonathan Granado v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan Ramirez vs. Gator's Custom Guns, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Washington vs. Virginia Duncan, et al., Petitioners v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California

Gun Rights cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.

No. 25-1338No. 25-153No. 25-198

Side by side

Jonathan Granado v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan Ramirez vs. Gator's Custom Guns, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Washington vs. Virginia Duncan, et al., Petitioners v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California, compared fact by fact
FactJonathan Granado v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan RamirezGator's Custom Guns, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. WashingtonVirginia Duncan, et al., Petitioners v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California
DocketJonathan Granado v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan Ramirez25-1338Gator's Custom Guns, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Washington25-153Virginia Duncan, et al., Petitioners v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California25-198
StatusJonathan Granado v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan RamirezBefore ArgumentsGator's Custom Guns, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. WashingtonBefore ArgumentsVirginia Duncan, et al., Petitioners v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of CaliforniaBefore Arguments
DateJonathan Granado v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan RamirezOctober Term 2025 (2025–2026)Gator's Custom Guns, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. WashingtonOctober Term 2025 (2025–2026)Virginia Duncan, et al., Petitioners v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of CaliforniaOctober Term 2025 (2025–2026)
Question presentedJonathan Granado v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan Ramirez1. Whether Officer Jonathan Granado’s use of deadly force on September 3, 2021 violated the Fourth Amendment when, after a high-speed chase, Estevan Ramirez emerged from the vehicle with gun in hand, refused an order to “get on the ground,” physically resisted an officer’s attempt to arrest, and attempted to escape towards the darkness of a residential neighborhood with gun still in hand. a. Did the panel correctly set forth the elements of an excessive force claim? b. Did the panel invert the qualified immunity analysis by shifting the burden from Ramirez to Officer Granado? c. Does the panel’s approach to qualified immunity force officers “to play roulette with their own existence”? 2. Whether any court other than the Supreme Court can clearly establish the law for purposes of qualified immunity, and if so, whether the panel majority correctly identified the clearly established law applicable to this case. 3. Whether this Court should resolve the controversies regarding qualified imm.Gator's Custom Guns, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Washington1. Whether the District’s ban on firearm magazines capable of holding “more than 10 rounds of ammunition” violates the Second Amendment, either facially or as applied, and, if so, which of appellant’s convictions should be reversed as a result of that constitutional infirmity? 2. Whether the District’s licensing and registration requirements violate the Second Amendment?Virginia Duncan, et al., Petitioners v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of CaliforniaWhether the Second Amendment protects the right of the people to possess these ubiquitous arms.
SummaryJonathan Granado v. Juanita Ramirez, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Estevan RamirezThis case concerns whether Officer Jonathan Granado is liable under the Fourth Amendment for using deadly force against Estevan Ramirez after a vehicle pursuit and confrontation in which Ramirez allegedly had a gun. Granado asks the Supreme Court to review the Fifth Circuit’s denial of qualified immunity and its analysis of excessive force and clearly established law.Gator's Custom Guns, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. WashingtonGator’s Custom Guns and Walter Wentz ask the Supreme Court to review Washington’s restrictions on ammunition magazines that can hold more than ten rounds. The case concerns whether those magazines are protected “Arms” under the Second Amendment.Virginia Duncan, et al., Petitioners v. Rob Bonta, Attorney General of CaliforniaThis case challenges California’s ban on firearm magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, including the law’s requirement that owners give up magazines they had lawfully acquired. The petitioners argue that these magazines are commonly owned for lawful purposes and therefore protected by the Second Amendment.

Relationship

Shared issue
Gun Rights
Why compared
Reviewed Gun Rights tags connect these current-term public cases.

Related

Sources

  • Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.