In January, the NRA filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in a challenge to California laws that effectively ban gun shows held on state property.
B&L Productions has operated gun shows on state property, including the Del Mar Fairgrounds and the Orange County Fair & Event Center, for over 30 years. Firearm transfers were generally forbidden at gun shows, but firearm sales could be initiated there—after which the purchaser would need to complete a successful background check, wait 10 days, and then pick up the firearm from a licensed retailer at another location. Two recently enacted California laws, however, prohibit anyone from even entering into a contract to purchase a firearm at a gun show. As a result of the laws, state officials have stopped allowing gun shows on state property.
Several plaintiffs challenged the restrictions in both the Southern and Central Districts of California, alleging violations of the First Amendment, Second Amendment and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
While the Southern District ruled in favor of the State, the Central District held that the State was likely violating the Second Amendment by unlawfully restricting firearm sales and also likely violating the First Amendment and Equal Protection Clause by engaging in unlawful viewpoint discrimination. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals consolidated the cases on appeal and upheld the laws. Regarding the Second Amendment, the court held that only “meaningful constraints” on the right to purchase firearms implicate the Second Amendment. The court then determined that the First Amendment does not protect speech constituting an “acceptance” in contract formation. Finally, determining that the Equal Protection claims duplicate the First Amendment claims, the court declined to address them.
The plaintiffs filed a petition asking the Supreme Court to hear the case. NRA’s brief supports that petition. NRA’s brief argues: (1) that lower courts are divided over whether the Second Amendment protects firearm purchases and that the Court should grant certiorari to establish that it does; (2) Britain’s prohibition on arms commerce sparked the Revolutionary War, and the Founders deliberately protected arms commerce when creating their own government; and (3) certiorari should be granted to cabin the Ninth Circuit’s concerted resistance to the Second Amendment.
We will be sure to update you on this case, or you can go to nraila.org for more timely information.
