It is rare we summarize orders and amended opinions. This is worth noting for the dissent. Think of it as Rehaif taking flight.

US v. Price, No. 15-50556 (11-27-20)(Order & Amended Opinion). The 9th denies a rehearing en banc; the panel denies a rehearing; and an amended opinion and concurrence is filed. The panel affirms a conviction for knowingly engaging in sexual contact without permission on an international flight in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2244(b). The majority finds that the “knowingly” is objective; not subjective. The concurrence disagrees and would find that knowingly is subjective but here the error is harmless. The panel concludes that Rehaif does not alter the conclusion.

In a dissent from en banc, Collins (joined by Ikuta and VanDyke for Parts I and II,  and Bumatay for for II(B)(1), argues that the 9th writes out “knowingly” from the statute. This is a missing element; it violates canons of construction; and it runs afoul of Rehaif by not applying “knowingly” to each element.

The lengthy dissent could be deemed addressed to SCOTUS. Keep an eye on this case; and use it to raise Rehaif applicability to all elements of charges.

Kudos to Jonathan Libby, FPD Cal central (Los Angeles) for this spirited appeal.

The decision is here:

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/11/27/15-50556.pdf