California Assault Weapons Ban Overturned By Federal Judge

A custom-made semiautomatic hunting rifle with a high-capađô thị detachable magazine is displayed at TDS Guns in Rocklin, Calif.
SAN FRANCISCO—A federal appeals court decided Tuesday lớn uphold California’s ban on large-capathành phố ammunition magazines in a ruling that is likely lớn lead lớn the court’s approval of the state’s ban on assault weapons.

Bạn đang xem: California assault weapons ban overturned by federal judge

In an en banc decision, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 7-4 that a state law that limits the form size of magazines — ammunition feeding devices for firearms — does not significantly interfere with the right to self-defense. The court noted that there was no evidence that a person has been unable lớn defend a home because of laông chồng of a large-capacity magazine.

During the past 50 years, the court said, large-capađô thị magazines have been used in about three-quarters of mass shootings that resulted in 10 or more deaths, & in 100% of massacres with 20 or more deaths.

“The ban on legal possession of large-capađô thị magazines reasonably supports California’s effort to lớn reduce the devastating damage wrought by mass shootings,” Judge Susan P. Graber, a Clinton appointee, wrote for the court.


Two other gun control cases have been put on hold pending a decision in the magazine case. Tuesday’s decision indicates that California’s ban on assault weapons, which a lower court had struông chồng down, is also likely lớn be ruled constitutional.

The four Republican appointees on the panel dissented — one of them accusing the majority of anti-gun bias — & a gun rights group said it would ask the U.S. Supreme Court khổng lồ overturn the ruling.

A majority of justices on the Supreme Court has expressed tư vấn for limiting gun regulations, and the court is expected next year to lớn strike down laws in California & New York that deny permits for most people lớn carry concealed weapons in public.

California’s large-capacity magazine ban, approved by voters in năm nhâm thìn, limits possession to magazines that hold 10 or fewer rounds of ammunition. A district judge and a divided three-judge 9th Circuit panel struông xã down the law, which Tuesday’s ruling revived.


*

“Large-capacity magazines allow a shooter lớn fire more bullets from a single firearm uninterrupted,” Graber wrote, “và a murderer’s pause lớn reload or switch weapons allows potential victims & law enforcement officers to lớn flee or to lớn confront the attacker.”

The court noted that Washington, D.C., và eight other states have also imposed restrictions on large-capathành phố magazines & that six other federal courts of appeals have upheld the laws.

“The ban on large-capathành phố magazines has the sole practical effect of requiring shooters to pause for a few seconds after firing 10 bullets, to lớn reload or to lớn replace the spent magazine,” Graber wrote. “Nothing in the record suggests that the restriction imposes any more than a minimal burden on the 2nd Amendment right khổng lồ keep & bear arms.”

U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez overturned both the magazine ban and the bar on assault weapons. In the assault weapons case, Benitez likened an AR-15 semiautomatic rifle to lớn a Swiss Army knife và called it “good for both home page and battle.”

Benitez, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said the assault weapons ban unconstitutionally infringed on the rights of California gun owners and “has had no effect” on curtailing mass shootings.


*

Ten new judges in 3 years have sầu turned the federal appeals court far more conservative sầu than it has been in decades. And the full effect hasn’t hit yet, judges say.


In a dissent Tuesday, 9th Circuit Judge Patrichồng J. Bumatay, a Trump appointee, said the banned magazines were “commonly owned by millions of law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”

“These magazines are neither dangerous và unusual, nor are they subject to longstanding regulatory measures,” Butamay, a Trump appointee, wrote.

Xem thêm: Tăng Vòng 1 Ở Tuổi Dậy Thì: 5 Cách Làm To Vòng 1 Tháng, 7 Cách Tăng Kích Thước Vòng 1 Cho Nàng Ngực Lép

Judge Lawrence VanDyke, another Trump appointee, wrote separately in a dissent that accused his colleagues of infusing their personal views inkhổng lồ the law.

“The majority of our court distrusts gun owners và thinks the 2nd Amendment is a vestigial organ of their living constitution,” VanDyke wrote.

VanDyke’s dissent, which no other judge signed, was unusual. Instead of focusing solely on the law, Van Dyke questioned the other judges’ neutrality.

VanDyke said that mass shootings were indeed “horrific” but also statistically rare. Large-scale magazines may be needed for self-defense when someone is attacked by a group of assailants, he said. The majority’s “views drive this circuit’s case law, ignoring the original meaning of the 2nd Amendment & fully exploiting the discretion inherent in the Supreme Court’s cases,” Van Dyke wrote.


*

9th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds a Hawaii regulation, ruling states may restrict the open carrying of guns


Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz, an Obama appointee, objected.

VanDyke’s dissent was as inappropriate and factually unfounded as “a statement by the majority that today’s dissenters are willing lớn rewrite the Constitution because of their personal infatuation with firearms,” Hurwitz wrote.

As khổng lồ VanDyke’s contention that mass shootings were rare, Hurwitz shot back: “The people of California should not be precluded from attempting to prevent mass murders simply because they don’t occur regularly enough in the eyes of an unelected Article III judge.”

Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle & Pistol Assn., said his group would ask the 9th Circuit lớn put a hold on the decision while the association seeks review in the U.S. Supreme Court.

The ban on possession of large-scale magazines had been stayed pending the outcome of the case and should continue to lớn be blocked until the Supreme Court decides whether khổng lồ weigh in, he said.

Michel predicted the Supreme Court would change the legal ground rules for evaluating gun laws và said the 9th Circuit should have delayed a ruling until after the high court’s decision next year on permits for carrying concealed weapons.

Supporters of gun regulations praised the 9th Circuit decision.

“Today’s ruling is the latest recognition from the federal courts that reasonable gun safety laws are entirely consistent with the 2nd Amendment,” said Eric Tirschwell, executive sầu director of Everytown Law, which litigates for a gun safety group. “This is great news for Californians and an important contribution to the centuries of legal precedent backing life-saving gun laws. “