Half of State Attorneys General Speak Out Against California Ban

by
posted on January 7, 2024
** When you buy products through the links on our site, we may earn a commission that supports NRA's mission to protect, preserve and defend the Second Amendment. **
concealed carry
(NRA)

Twenty-five state attorneys general, co-led by Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen (R) and Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador (R), have filed an amicus brief to speak out against California’s unconstitutional law banning magazines that are capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

Knudsen noted in his release announcing the filing of the brief that it was intended to “safeguard law-abiding individuals’ right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense against unnecessary intrusion.” The release added, “In this case, that unnecessary intrusion is a California law banning firearm magazines that can hold more than ten rounds.”

“The district court properly concluded that California’s law unconstitutionally restricts the fundamental right to keep and bear common firearm magazines typically possessed for lawful purposes,” the attorneys general state in the brief. “This Court should follow the Supreme Court’s mandate from HellerMcDonald, and Bruen by affirming the district court based on the text, history and tradition associated with the Second Amendment and magazines with a capacity over ten rounds.”

California currently bans magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, and U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez called the law “clearly constitutional,” but California has appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of appeals for the Ninth Circuit and is seeking to have Judge Benitez’s decision reversed.

“The State denies a citizen the federal constitutional right to use common weapons of their own choosing for self-defense,” wrote Benitez. “There have been, and there will be, times where many more than 10 rounds are needed to stop attackers. Yet, under this statute, the State says, ‘too bad.’”

Benitez also said, “It says, if you think you need more than 10 chances to defend yourself against criminal attackers, you must carry more magazines. Or carry more bullets to hand reload and fumble into your small magazine while the attackers take advantage of your pause. On the other hand, you can become a criminal, too.”

Following the ruling, California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) filed an appeal, which sent the case back to the Ninth Circuit.  The case originated in 2017 as Duncan v Becerra (Becerra was Cal. AG at the time), and has already been to the Ninth Circuit, and was at one point being considered for a hearing before the United States Supreme Court.  After the landmark ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established a new paradigm for considering legal questions related to the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Ninth Circuit for a new review under the Bruen standard.  The Ninth Circuit, in turn, sent the case back to the district court, which resulted in the ruling by Judge Benitez.

In addition to Knudsen and Labrador, the amicus brief filed in support of the Benitez decision includes attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Knudsen has previously helped guide similar efforts in support of Americans’ constitutional rights. Last year, he co-led a coalition of 26 attorneys general, along with the Arizona State Legislature, against the Biden administration’s blatantly unconstitutional attack on law-abiding Americans’ Second Amendment rights.

And in an interview with America’s 1st Freedom Editor in Chief Frank Miniter, Knudsen explained why the NRA’s First Amendment case NRA v. Vullo is so crucial.

“Government should not be able to come in and act like the mafia,” said Knudsen in the interview. “And that’s really what this was. I mean you had Maria Vullo come in and act like a mobster and basically threaten companies for doing business with the NRA, and it wasn’t overt … . She never made any direct threats, but it was like a Tony Soprano situation. You know, ‘boy, that’s a nice business you have. It would be an awful shame if anything were to happen to it!’”

Latest

PLCAA in marble
PLCAA in marble

Cynical Strategies To Subvert The Protection Of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act

Since President George W. Bush signed the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) into law on Oct. 26, 2005, those bent on civilian disarmament have sought to bypass the legislation’s clear commands. In fact, 20 years later, gunmakers were fending off a frivolous nuisance suit from the city of Gary, Ind., filed in 1999, despite the PLCAA and state-analogue legislation.

The New York Times Tries to Explain the Drop in Crime

The New York Times is attempting to explain away the Trump administration's success at lowering crime rates with these explanations.

Winner-Take-All Elections Mark A New Chapter In The Second Amendment

Will a meaningful Second Amendment survive in Virginia? That this is even an open question shows how dramatically one election can reshape a state when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms.

Part 1: How the Mainstream Media Lost Touch With America—The Takeover by the Elites

Why is so much of the mainstream, legacy or corporate media opposed to our right to keep and bear arms? This three-part series attempts to answer these critical questions—understanding, after all, leads to solutions.

President’s Column | NRA Focus On The Vision

I can’t believe it’s been seven months since I was elected NRA president, and I’m already composing my eighth President’s Column. The officers never fully anticipated or appreciated the immense challenges we faced when elected.

Standing Guard | The NRA is Strong

The strength of the NRA is, and has always been, our membership. Without our millions of members, we would not be able to effectively rally behind elections for pro-freedom politicians; just as importantly, if not for our large membership, our representatives in office would not feel the same urgency to listen to us in this constitutional republic.

Interests



Get the best of America's 1st Freedom delivered to your inbox.