Judge finds California’s ban on high-capacity magazines unconstitutional

April 1, 2019

A federal judge ruled Friday that California’s ban on high-capacity gun magazines is unconstitutional, striking down a key provision of a successful 2016 ballot initiative that was proposed by now-Gov. Gavin Newsom. [San Francisco Chronicle]

In 2000, a state law took effect making it illegal for Californians to buy or sell magazines that hold more than 10 cartridges. The law, however, allowed individuals who already owned high-capacity magazines to keep them.

Proposition 63, which passed with 63 percent voter support, required anyone who still owned high-capacity magazines to turn them in, remake them in order to comply with state law, or send them outside of California. But, that aspect of the law has never taken effect.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the provision pertaining to high-capacity magazines, and in 2017, two days before the law was scheduled to take effect, San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez issued a statewide injunction. On Friday, Benitez ruled in favor of the NRA, finding that the expanded ban on high-capacity magazines is a violation of the Second Amendment.

“Individual liberty and freedom are not outmoded concepts,” Benitez wrote in a 86-page ruling

Benitez’s ruling cites three home invasions in which women fought against their attackers. In two of the home invasions, the female victims ran out of bullets, while in the third, the woman successfully used a high-capacity magazine to take on intruders while using one hand to make a phone call for help.

Mass shootings are far less common than robberies, aggravated assaults and homicides in homes, the judge said.

Gov. Newsom responded to the ruling in a tweet saying that failing to uphold the high-capacity magazine ban puts communities in danger, and “we will not stand for it.”

“Large capacity magazines allow a shooter to fire at large numbers of people — quickly. Lives are rapidly lost because of a single senseless act,” Newsom said in the tweet.

California is expected to appeal Benitez’s ruling to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has a history of upholding gun control laws.


Loading...
ActaNonVerba

“Gun control”… Like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it more difficult/expensive for law-abiding drivers to purchase a new vehicle and fill-up their gas tanks. Pure ridiculousness!


How about we redefine “gun control” as “the ability to shoot straight and hit one’s target?”


DPINC

Ya ever tried to shoot a squirrel….ya Definatley need a high capacity magazine them little suckers are fast …or a magnum 500


Kalifornia_Bud

It’s time to take our State back from these people who cannot even police themselves..


shelworth

So everyone that turned their magazines into the police can go pick them up, right?


aft50s

Did anyone actually turn them in?


aye-caramba

this law has saved NO ONE ever. Silly, reminiscent of those with “ban” mentality. Glad the judge saw it correctly.


Side_Show_Bob

A rogue government running this state. Not doing the work of the people but the work of their own interest. So many in this state no longer have a voice and the Democrat Party is doing anything and everything they can to keep to keep it that way.


So many of the laws that are passed at the 11th hour by this rogue group are unconstitutional but the whole idea is to completely overwhelm those groups that they cannot afford to fight and their own tax dollars are being used against them. This is just ONE of MANY! Of course this will be heard by the 9th Jerkit Court of Shlameels that has THE WORSE record of Circuit Courts in the nation.


nazbol gang

Awesome. A small ray of light among the dark clouds.


Stunned

Good news for once.


SLOInd

Yeah. You need high capacity mags to protect your freedom since thoughts and prayers aren’t working as well as anticipated. Machine guns for everyone.. because its ‘Merica.


shelworth

No, it’s just a pain in the ass to reload…


ActaNonVerba

Why did you bring up “machine guns?” They have nothing to do with this conversation. They have been under tight control since the National Firearms Act of 1934.


nazbol gang

I’m all for fully automatic weapons being legal.