The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ruled that California’s background check law for ammunition purchases violates the Second Amendment.
The decision in Rhode v. Bonta, leaned on a legal framework established by the US Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires courts to evaluate gun laws through a “text and history” test. Under this standard, modern firearms regulations must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of gun control as understood at the time of the Constitution’s ratification.
The Ninth Circuit determined California’s law burdens conduct protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment because it restricts access to ammunition, a necessary component for keeping firearms operable. The court wrote that the law “meaningfully constrains the right to keep and bear arms.”
The panel researched whether the state’s background check requirement for ammunition had any historical analogues, and found no evidence of any similar regulation in the 18th or 19th centuries. Judges concluded that the law lacked historical precedent.
The court also addressed a specific footnote in Bruen in which the Supreme Court noted that certain “shall-issue” licensing schemes may be constitutional. However, the Ninth Circuit found this footnote irrelevant to California’s law, which applies not to concealed carry permits but to the purchase of ammunition. The court emphasized that the California regime imposes a more severe burden by requiring a background check before each and every ammunition purchase, regardless of previous checks.
In affirming the lower court’s permanent injunction, the Ninth Circuit said California’s law is incompatible with the Constitution’s protection of the right to bear arms. Unless the decision is stayed or overturned by the Supreme Court, which appears unlikely, California can no longer enforce its background check requirement for ammunition sales.
All restrictive gun control laws are the same. They all say:
“You, a law abiding and responsible person should not be allowed to own and use an item in a law abiding and responsible manner because someone you have never may ‘may’ use a similar item illegally.”
.
A clear violation of the 5th, 6th, 4th, and possibly 8th Amendments to the Constitution.
Do you think the gun grabbers care about the Constitution? Obama himself said it was “cumbersome.” The real push is to continue work with the medical community and classify guns as a health hazard and pandemic. Red flag laws will also persist.
If they cared about the Constitution, there would be no restrictive gun control laws.
.
And, I am 100% sure no gun control advocate will read my comment, or if they do, understand it. It was not meant for them. It was meant for the folks who are on the side of gun rights, and those that are indifferent. Hopefully, the arguments against gun control laws will get better as a result. If nothing else, perhaps I got someone to think beyond the 2nd.
The existence of the Second Amendment is an enormous bother to many that would like to expand the power of government to control everything. The folks in 1791 got it right.
Whether Congress continues to have a pro-2A majority in each house will have much to do about the direction of gun control, especially because President Trump may well have at least one more Supreme Court appointment to make sometime during this 4-year term of office. Alaska will do its part by re-electing Begich and Sullivan, but every congressional election will be important.
Don’t forget about Assembly, Legislature and Gubernatorial races next year. There is a lot of good and bad on 2A that can be done at the state level. Sigh. There is always another election. Cheers –
All they are doing by attacking gun owners and making New Laws against gun ownership is creating a situation where more guns get sold , more guns get MFGerd both by individuals and gun makers. The anti gun lobby is actually responsible for inflating gun ownership multiplying it 2 or 3 times over the last 30 years, especially in the last 15 years, there’s now probably more guns out there now they don’t know about, then the ones they do. This was not by accident, the anti gun lobby is just as responsible as anyone for the ballooned manufacturing of guns, now there is absolutely no way ever to keep track of what’s out there, it’s pretty much a wide open market nation wide, so more laws actually mean nothing nowdays, when 50 million or so people choose to own or possess multiple weapons, good luck with more gun laws, its really a Total non factor anymore, thanks to the liberal kooks who basicly created a international weapons enterprise by pushing ridiculous laws onto to the law abiding people. Now none of the laws really matter because there’s no way to understand any of the laws, therefore zero compliance of any. Realistic The libs are probably making money on it via Non profits and other schemes!