The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned California’s law limiting firearm purchases to one per 30 days, sparking a heated debate on gun rights and public safety.
At a Glance
- Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals blocks California’s one-gun-per-month purchase limit
- Ruling based on Second Amendment rights and lack of historical precedent
- Decision allows Californians to buy multiple firearms within a 30-day period
- Gun rights advocates celebrate, while state officials may seek further legal action
Court Overturns California Gun Purchase Limit
In a significant victory for Second Amendment advocates, the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has prevented California’s law limiting gun purchases to one every 30 days from taking effect. This ruling, which overturns a longstanding restriction on firearm acquisitions, has sent shockwaves through the state’s gun control landscape.
The decision stems from a lawsuit filed in December 2020 by the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and other plaintiffs, challenging the constitutionality of California’s purchase limit. U.S. District Court Judge William Hayes initially issued an injunction against the law, basing his ruling on the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case NYSRPA v. Bruen.
Legal Alert: The Ninth Circuit has reinstated a district court's injunction against CA's one-gun-per-month law, meaning the law can't be enforced while the case proceeds.
Read the amicus brief NRA filed in the case: https://t.co/UUPdoFxV4U pic.twitter.com/bGQQgsGvIz
— NRA (@NRA) August 16, 2024
Legal Basis and Historical Context
The Bruen decision established a new standard for evaluating gun laws, requiring the government to justify regulations based on historical tradition. Judge Hayes found that California’s attempts to cite historical gun restrictions targeting Native Americans as precedent were “dubious” at best.
The judge noted that historical laws did not include limits on the quantity or frequency of firearm acquisitions, undermining California’s argument for maintaining the restriction. This interpretation aligns with a growing trend of courts scrutinizing gun control measures more closely in light of recent Supreme Court guidance.
California defends one-gun-a-month law at Ninth Circuit @SamRibakoff https://t.co/EiIUyofSHE
— Courthouse News (@CourthouseNews) August 14, 2024
Reactions and Implications
Gun rights advocates have celebrated the ruling as a significant win for Second Amendment protections. Brandon Combs, President of the Firearms Policy Coalition, stated emphatically:
“This order allows our hard-won injunction to take effect and, unless the Ninth Circuit issues a new stay, Californians may now apply to purchase multiple firearms within a 30-day period,” said Firearms Policy Coalition President Brandon Combs. “FPC intends to make Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta respect Second Amendment rights whether they like it or not.”
The decision has far-reaching implications for California’s gun control efforts. The state had argued that the purchase limit, first imposed on handguns in 1999 and later extended to all firearms, was necessary to prevent “straw purchases” and did not infringe on rights as it still allowed up to 12 purchases a year. However, the court’s ruling suggests that even such limitations may not withstand constitutional scrutiny under the new Bruen standard.
Looking Ahead
As the dust settles on this landmark decision, both sides are preparing for the next phase of the legal battle. It remains unclear whether the California Department of Justice will seek a review by a larger en banc panel of the 9th Circuit or pursue other legal avenues to reinstate the purchase limit.
For now, California residents can purchase firearms without the previous 30-day restriction, marking a significant shift in the state’s gun control landscape. This ruling may also inspire challenges to similar laws in other states, potentially reshaping gun regulations across the country.
As the debate between public safety concerns and constitutional rights continues, this decision underscores the ongoing tension in American society over the proper balance between gun control measures and the Second Amendment. The Ninth Circuit’s ruling is likely to be just one chapter in the ongoing legal saga surrounding gun rights in the United States.
Sources
- Ninth Circuit puts hold on California’s ‘one gun per month’ law
- Ninth Circuit tosses California law limiting gun purchases to one every 30 days
- Ninth Circuit puts hold on California’s ‘one gun per month’ law
- 9th Circuit blocks California’s law limiting gun purchases to one per month
- Appeals court ruling in San Diego case lifts ban on frequent gun purchases, for now
