UPDATE: Fight Over California’s “1-in-30” Firearm Ban Kicks Off at Ninth Circuit By:

0
29

[[{“value”:”

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!

SAN FRANCISCO (May 13, 2024) – Today, the State of California will file their opening brief in their appeal of FPC’s district court victory in Michelle Nguyen v. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a federal lawsuit challenging California’s ban on multiple firearm purchases within a 30-day period. Individuals who want to support this and dozens of other cases can join the FPC Grassroots Army at JoinFPC.org.

Notably, only five states have ever imposed gun bans like the law challenged in this case, and none did so before 1975. California could not meet its burden even under the lower court’s “more nuanced approach” to determining the constitutionality of the State’s ban. While the district court properly rejected each of California’s arguments defending the law at the trial phase, we expect the State to make the same failed arguments in their appeal because there is no constitutionally sound justification for this ban.

We expect that California will argue that “the Second Amendment’s text… does not cover the unconditional right to purchase firearms, let alone a right to purchase any number of firearms in a single 30-day period.” We also expect that the State will defend its ban by arguing that it “falls within the category of presumptively lawful regulatory measures recognized in [District of Columbia v. Heller], because it regulates when a commercial firearm transaction can take place.” And if the State maintains course, they are likely also to frivolously argue that the ban “addresses unprecedented societal concerns or dramatic technological changes” and that the ban “is consistent with the Second Amendment under the standards” established in the Supreme Court’s NYSRPA v. Bruen decision. As it has in other challenges to its unconstitutional gun control laws, the State will almost certainly rely on dubious examples of historical regulations and outright racist laws to support its unconstitutional ban.

This lawsuit began almost four years ago, in December of 2020, when FPC first filed the challenge. FPC’s answering brief, which is currently due in late May, will once again show why California’s unconstitutional law cannot survive. Plaintiffs in the case include FPC, individual FPC members Michelle Nguyen, Dominic Boguski, Jay Medina, Frank Colletti, John Phillips, Darin Prince, FPC retailer members Poway Weapons and Gear and North County Shooting Center, as well as the San Diego County Gun Owners PAC and the Second Amendment Foundation.

Firearms Policy Coalition (firearmspolicy.org), a 501(c)4 nonprofit membership organization, exists to create a world of maximal human liberty, defend constitutional rights, advance individual liberty, and restore freedom. FPC’s efforts are focused on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and adjacent issues including freedom of speech, due process, unlawful searches and seizures, separation of powers, asset forfeitures, privacy, encryption, and limited government. The FPC team are next-generation advocates working to achieve the Organization’s strategic objectives through litigation, research, scholarly publications, amicus briefing, legislative and regulatory action, grassroots activism, education, outreach, and other programs. For more on FPC’s lawsuits and other pro-Second Amendment initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, X (Twitter), Facebook, and YouTube.

  • Legal,
  • Press Releases

“}]]