Diff: Roger Thomas Benitez

'''Roger Thomas Benitez''' is a retired United States district judge who served on the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. He was appointed by President George W. Bush, entered service in 2004, took senior status in 2017, and retired from federal judicial service on 2 April 2026.

'''Roger Thomas Benitez''' is a retired United States district judge who served on the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. He was appointed by President George W. Bush, entered service in 2004, took senior status in 2017, and retired from federal judicial service on 2 April 2026.

Benitez became widely discussed for a series of Second Amendment decisions involving California firearm and weapons laws. Some of those rulings were later reversed or returned for further proceedings by higher courts. In 2024, the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit publicly reprimanded him over his treatment of a 13-year-old spectator in a criminal sentencing hearing.

Benitez became widely discussed for a series of Second Amendment decisions involving California firearm and weapons laws. Some of those rulings were later reversed or returned for further proceedings by higher courts. In 2024, the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit publicly reprimanded him over his treatment of a 13-year-old spectator in a criminal sentencing hearing.

== Early Life and Education ==

== Early Life and Education ==

== Legal Career ==

== Legal Career ==

Benitez worked in private practice in Imperial County, California, from 1978 to 1997. He then served as a judge of the Superior Court of California for Imperial County from 1997 to 2001. He also taught at Imperial Valley College from 1998 to 1999.

Benitez worked in private practice in Imperial County, California, from 1978 to 1997. He then served as a judge of the Superior Court of California for Imperial County from 1997 to 2001. He also taught at Imperial Valley College from 1998 to 1999.

From 2001 to 2004, Benitez served as a United States magistrate judge for the Southern District of California.

From 2001 to 2004, Benitez served as a United States magistrate judge for the Southern District of California.

== Federal Judicial Service ==

== Federal Judicial Service ==

President George W. Bush nominated Benitez to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California on 1 May 2003. The United States Senate confirmed him on 17 June 2004, and his commission was issued on 21 June 2004.

President George W. Bush nominated Benitez to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California on 1 May 2003. The United States Senate confirmed him on 17 June 2004, and his commission was issued on 21 June 2004.

Benitez assumed senior status on 31 December 2017. His federal judicial service ended on 2 April 2026 when he retired.

Benitez assumed senior status on 31 December 2017. His federal judicial service ended on 2 April 2026 when he retired.

He also served as a member of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation from 2020 to 2026.

He also served as a member of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation from 2020 to 2026.

== Firearms and Weapons Cases ==

== Firearms and Weapons Cases ==

Benitez is best known outside the legal profession for decisions involving California firearm and weapons restrictions. His rulings were often cited by gun rights advocates and criticised by gun control supporters.

Benitez is best known outside the legal profession for decisions involving California firearm and weapons restrictions. His rulings were often cited by gun rights advocates and criticised by gun control supporters.

One prominent example was ''Duncan v. Bonta'', a challenge to California's restrictions on large-capacity magazines. Benitez ruled against the state in the district court. In March 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's conclusion and instructed that judgment be entered for California Attorney General Rob Bonta.

One prominent example was ''Duncan v. Bonta'', a challenge to California's restrictions on large-capacity magazines. Benitez ruled against the state in the district court. In March 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's conclusion and instructed that judgment be entered for California Attorney General Rob Bonta.

Benitez also ruled in cases concerning assault weapon restrictions, ammunition background checks, and California's ban on billy clubs. Several of these cases moved through appeals, so the district court ruling and the later appellate result are separate parts of the record.

Benitez also ruled in cases concerning assault weapon restrictions, ammunition background checks, and California's ban on billy clubs. Several of these cases moved through appeals, so the district court ruling and the later appellate result are separate parts of the record.

== Judicial Misconduct Finding ==

== Judicial Misconduct Finding ==

In May 2024, the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit issued an order concerning misconduct complaints against Benitez. The complaints arose from criminal sentencing hearings in February 2023.

In May 2024, the Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit issued an order concerning misconduct complaints against Benitez. The complaints arose from criminal sentencing hearings in February 2023.

The main finding concerned the sentencing hearing of Mario Puente. During that hearing, Benitez ordered a deputy United States marshal to handcuff Puente's 13-year-old daughter. The Judicial Council found that she was present to support her father, that her behaviour was not at issue, and that Benitez had no authority to order her restraint in those circumstances.

The main finding concerned the sentencing hearing of Mario Puente. During that hearing, Benitez ordered a deputy United States marshal to handcuff Puente's 13-year-old daughter. The Judicial Council found that she was present to support her father, that her behaviour was not at issue, and that Benitez had no authority to order her restraint in those circumstances.

The council publicly reprimanded Benitez. It found that his conduct included abusive or harassing behaviour, failure to maintain high standards of judicial conduct, failure to promote public confidence in the judiciary, and failure to treat the child respectfully and courteously. The council also confirmed a limitation on his approved judicial duties, restricting newly assigned work to non-criminal civil matters for three years.

The council publicly reprimanded Benitez. It found that his conduct included abusive or harassing behaviour, failure to maintain high standards of judicial conduct, failure to promote public confidence in the judiciary, and failure to treat the child respectfully and courteously. The council also confirmed a limitation on his approved judicial duties, restricting newly assigned work to non-criminal civil matters for three years.

The council dismissed a separate allegation arising from another sentencing hearing, finding that his conduct in that hearing did not rise to cognisable misconduct.

The council dismissed a separate allegation arising from another sentencing hearing, finding that his conduct in that hearing did not rise to cognisable misconduct.

== Retirement ==

== Retirement ==

== See Also ==

== See Also ==

* [[Second Amendment to the United States Constitution]]

* [[Second Amendment to the United States Constitution]]

* [[United States District Court]]

* [[United States District Court]]

== References ==

== References ==

* [https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/misconduct/23-90037and23-90041-News-Release-Order.pdf Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit misconduct order, 2024]

* [https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/misconduct/23-90037and23-90041-News-Release-Order.pdf Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit misconduct order, 2024]

* [https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/03/20/23-55805.pdf Ninth Circuit opinion in Duncan v. Bonta, 2025]

* [https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/03/20/23-55805.pdf Ninth Circuit opinion in Duncan v. Bonta, 2025]