SAN DIEGO鈥擜 federal appeals court upheld on Nov. 30聽California’s聽ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines, which a San Diego federal judge聽previously overturned and ruled as unconstitutional.
A divided Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled鈥攂y a 7-4 margin鈥攖hat聽California’s ban “on legal possession of large-capacity magazines聽reasonably supported California’s effort to reduce the devastating damage聽wrought by mass shootings.”
ban outlaws magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez in San Diego previously blocked聽the ban, ruling that the law violated the Second Amendment rights of gun owners聽and that its passage was an overreaction to high-profile gun crimes.
Benitez issued his ruling in favor of several San Diego County gun聽owners who argued the ban burdened lawful gun owners and did little to reduce聽violence.
Benitez’s decision was upheld by a three-judge 9th Circuit panel last聽summer, prompting the “en banc” review of the case by the full court at the聽request of the California Attorney General’s Office.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta applauded the ruling and said the decision was “a victory for public safety in California.”
He said gun violence is “an epidemic in this country,” and the ban is a “commonsense [way] to prevent this violence, including desvastating mass shootings. … Our laws keep Californians safe while聽allowing law-abiding gun owners to exercise their constitutional rights.”
A plaintiff in the original lawsuit, Chuck Michel, who is the president of California Rifle & Pistol Association, said the organization would appeal the聽ruling.
“We are truly disappointed that the Ninth Circuit en banc panel聽decided to go against the solid constitutional reasoning of other judges to聽strike down this win for gun owners,” who “deserve to have someone fighting for them and their rights.聽 Second Amendment is a fundamental right, and it is time that courts stop聽treating that right like a second-class gift from government,” Michel said.
Judge Susan P. Graber, who authored the majority opinion, wrote the聽law “is a reasonable fit for the important government interest of reducing gun聽violence.”
According to Graber, large-capacity magazines have been used in about 75 percent of gun killings with 10 or more deaths and in all cases with more than 20 deaths聽over the past 50 years.
In a dissenting opinion, Judge Patrick Bumatay, joined by聽Judges Sandra Ikuta and Ryan Nelson, wrote that the ban infringes on聽Californians’ Second Amendment rights and, if applied nationwide, “it would聽require confiscating half of all existing firearms magazines in this country.”
dissent continued, “While we acknowledge that California asserts聽a public safety interest, we cannot bend the law to acquiesce to a policy that聽contravenes the clear decision made by the American people when they ratified聽the Second Amendment.”
Pezou : Appeals Court Upholds California’s High-Capacity Magazine Ban