A federal judge strikes down California law mandating background checks to all firearm purchases and prohibiting residents of the state from bringing home ammunition purchased outside of the state.
According to U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, the law is unconstitutional and violates the Second Amendment. Moreover, the section of the law barring out-of-state purchases violates the dormant Commerce Clause, and a federal regulation governing the interstate transportation of firearms supersedes the mandate.
Judge Benitez has already turned down the law in April 2020, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals brought back the law.
Before the appeals court ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court published an opinion in a similar case in New York that altered Second Amendment case law.
Moreover, Benitez turned down the request of California Attorney Gen. Rob Bonta to pause his decision while they appealed the case to a higher court.
The basis of Benitez’s decision refers to the 2022 US Supreme Court decision on New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.
According to the decision, gun laws that are not deeply rooted in American history or analogous to some historical law are generally unconstitutional.
“A sweeping background check requirement imposed every time a citizen needs to buy ammunition is an outlier that our ancestors would have never accepted for a citizen,” Benitez ruled.
The judge also blasted the state on their attempt to justify its modern ammunition restrictions under Bruen by using 48 historical laws that oppressed slaves and other racial minorities from owning ammunition.
Benitez called the historical laws cited by the Attorney General a “long, embarrassing, disgusting, insidious, reprehensible list of examples of government tyranny toward our own people.”
Benitez also blasted that the mandate turns down at least 322 individuals for allegedly failing their “background checks.”
“How many of the 58,087 needed ammunition to defend themselves against an impending criminal threat and how many were simply preparing for a sporting event, we will never know,” Benitez said.
“What is known is that in almost all cases, the 322 individuals that are rejected each day are being denied permission to freely exercise their Second Amendment right — a right which our Founders instructed shall not be infringed.”
Atty. Chuck Michael, who represented the plaintiffs that calls for overturning of the law thanked Benitez for his decision.
“This law, like most of California’s gun control laws, has not made anyone safer. But it has made it much more difficult and expensive for law-abiding gun owners to exercise their Second Amendment right to defend themselves and their family,” according to Michael.
“It has blocked many eligible people from getting the ammunition they need — which is the true political intent behind most of these laws.”
