Gavin Newsom,Rob Bonta
AG Rob Bonta and Gov. Gavin Newsom, losers again at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Lawful Californians can now officially buy as many guns as they want whenever they want to—just like citizens in most of the rest of the United States—thanks to a Thursday ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

In the case Nguyen v. Bonta, the court issued an order reversing the previously issued stay in the lawsuit, which challenges California’s gun rationing law that allows only one gun purchase in every 30 days.  With the stay reversed, the final judgment and injunction the Firearms Policy Coalition secured at the district court is now in effect, preventing the state from enforcing the punitive law.

The lawsuit was brought by the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), and officials with the organization were thrilled with the court’s ruling.

“This order allows our hard-won injunction to take effect and, unless the 9th Circuit issues a new stay, Californians may now apply to purchase multiple firearms within a 30-day period,” said Brandon Combs, FPC president. “FPC intends to make Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta respect Second Amendment rights whether they like it or not.”

In March, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California ruled the one-gun-a-month (OGM) law to be unconstitutional because it infringes on the plaintiff’s Second Amendment rights and the state didn’t meet the second Bruen standard of showing a historical precedent for the law during the founding period. The best the state could do is prove there were licensing taxing regulations, and that’s what it based its defense of the law on.

“The taxing and licensing regulations are not ‘relevantly similar’ to the OGM law,” Judge William Q Hays wrote in the court’s opinion on the case. “Unlike the OGM law, taxing and licensing regulations placed no limit on the quantity or frequency with which one could acquire firearms. In fact, the licensing regulations proffered by Defendants imposed no burden on the acquisition of firearms; they regulated only the seller. Accordingly, these laws do not establish a ‘tradition of firearm regulation’ similar to the OGM law.”

Because of that, the court determined that the law was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

“Defendants have not met their burden of producing a ‘well-established and representative historical analogue’ to the OGM law,” the opinion concluded. “The Court therefore concludes that Plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgment as to the constitutionality of the OGM law under the Second Amendment.”

Following that ruling, the state was able to get the court to stay the opinion pending its appeal to the 9th Circuit, which has now lifted the stay.

Incidentally, it wasn’t too many years ago that the 9th Circuit was the most gun unfriendly circuit court in the country, regularly issuing outrageous rulings concerning Second Amendment cases. But during former President Donald Trump’s tenure in the White House, he appointed 10 new judges to the court, representing more than a third of the full 9th Circuit.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

52 COMMENTS

  1. RE: “The best the state could do is prove there were licensing taxing regulations, and that’s what it based its defense of the law on.”

    The old bigoted poll tax defense.

  2. I looked out my 2nd story window this morning and saw winged swine airborne.

    For all you never Trumper’s out there. Kiss My Ass.

    • I’ll wait until I see Beelzebub himself wearing a pair of hockey skates before I declare the Ninth
      ” fixed “

    • A proper judiciary has been the best counter to the anti-2A tyrants. The never Trumpers/libertarian party/third party voting/supposedly pro-gun voters don’t get it.

      • Lots of normal conservatives and gun owners don’t get it either. Sometimes the biggest things we do are akin to planting trees where we will never see the shade or taste the fruit.

    • One of my long ago ex-wife’s reply to practically ANYthing was, “When pigs fly”. Eventually, I flew.

  3. So Californians can now own guns just like Americans ? and they can buy as many as they want just like Americans ? and can they buy ammunition like Americans ? and will they one day have safe and clean streets like Americans ? and will they be able to buy I.C.E. automobiles like Americans ? One Gun Law does NOT A Republic make !

    • “So Californians can now own guns just like Americans ? and they can buy as many as they want just like Americans ? and can they buy ammunition like Americans ? “

      Yes, but all under the watchful eye of the CADOJ, thanks to the Dems’ registration system for everything you buy…even ammo. The Dems don’t want you to have any privacy when it comes to your property.

      • I’ve been perusing Gunbroker lately in search of an elusive item and I couldn’t help but notice how many items are not available for shipment to California, and I’m talking revolvers not firearms with so called “high capacity” magazines. It’s like sellers are saying to California, “Chuck you, Farley, you ain’t so mucking futch”.

        • I’ve read notices from at least two outside-of-CA retailers stating they won’t ship to us because it’s too much hassle to navigate the shifting sands of our gun laws. It’s legal, then it isn’t, then a judge rules a gun law isn’t constitutional and the act is legal again, then an appeal and it isn’t while the matter is on hold, then another ruling and it’s legal, then an appeal to another court and it’s stayed, then…and then…and then…

          And therein lies the rub, and the goal of the anti-freedom Dems here in our State.

    • No, we can’t buy ammo like the rest of the country–yet. This suit attacks only the one in thirty law. Ammo still requires an instant background check, and ammo can only be purchased through an ffl or authorized ammo dealer. On line purchases must be shipped to an ffl or ammo dealer–if you can find one to accept the shipment. No home delivery.

  4. ILLANNOY had the one every 30 daze bs when I bought my 1st handgun 13 years ago. Not sure if it was only Cook county or if it the whole state. Either way I quickly learned not to buy in Cook. Or later pay the $25 sin tax er “violence”scam for a handgun. They never attempted to collect it. Now my local Gunshop(which I dislike)automatically collect s the $25 slush fund tax. Good on the 9th circus but don’t they still have the obscene 10 day waiting period???

    • We do have the 10 day wait. Our guns are all registered. So they’ve conducted and know they’ve conducted numerous waits for guns on me. But I still have to wait if I buy another.

      reasons, I guess.

      • How about this…

        The majority of my items are off grid and not registered (and all legal for various reasons). But I recently purchased a gun from an active dual-sworn LEO/LEA who’s both a local Detective *and* a Federal Marshal. As we were both in our LGS for the DROS transfer, he stated he also must wait thru our mandatory 10-day waiting period, and must even go thru a BGC for ammo just like anyone else. The employee doing the paperwork nodded his acknowledgement of that situation.

        In fact, both the LEO and I were legally carrying concealed on our persons in the store, yet the waiting period was still mandatory. Sacramento’s reasoning is that a person purchasing a gun needs a “cooling off period” in case the decision to acquire the gun is being made in haste for the intent to do harm to self or others. Yet…we were both already in immediate possession of legal guns, had both undergone multiple BGCs, heck…he’s an agent of both the State and Federal governments, yet can’t be trusted by our politicians because reasons, amirite?

        Clown world. But then, these are the same Democrats who are forcing us in CA to buy electric vehicles, while at the same time telling us we cannot plug them in to charge them because the electricity demand is too high. Morons.

        • I say get yourself a backup generator, get everyone to charge their e-cars all at once and take a hot shower if you have an electric hot water heater. Maybe a few brownouts and some extended blackouts will wake up a few of those who are not stoned.

  5. Hell I suspect there arent many guns on the approved lose. I doubt you can find two that you want within 30 days

    • You can by guns off the approved list if you buy it from a law enforcement officer.
      They can own and then sell guns not on the list

        • State Exemptions for Authorized Peace Officers in California.

          https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/exemptpo

          “Non-Roster Handgun (Unsafe Handgun) Exemptions

          Criminal penalties may attach to persons who sell, purchase, give, or otherwise transfer a non-roster handgun. However, there are three groups of public entities that may purchase non-roster handguns. The prerequisites for purchase, the eligibility of sworn members of the entities to purchase non-roster handguns for personal use, and the restrictions on resale vary. For complete details please see California Penal Code section 32000, et seq. The three groups and relevant restrictions are:

          Group 1 (for use in the discharge of their official duties):

          The Department of Justice.
          A police department.
          A sheriff’s official.
          A marshal’s office.
          The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
          The Department of the California Highway Patrol.
          Any district attorney’s office.
          Any federal law enforcement agency.
          The military or naval forces of this state or of the United States.

          Purchase, Use, and Resale Restrictions: The sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies is also permitted. These sworn members may purchase non-roster handguns for personal use and may generally sell or transfer the non-roster handgun to any firearm eligible purchaser at a licensed firearm dealer.

          Group 2 (for use as a service weapon):

          The Department of Parks and Recreation.
          The Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
          The Division of Investigation of the Department of Consumer Affairs.
          The Department of Motor Vehicles.
          The Fraud Division of the Department of Insurance.
          The State Department of State Hospitals.
          The Department of Fish and Wildlife.
          The State Department of Developmental Services.
          The Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
          A county probation department.
          The Los Angeles World Airports, as defined in California Penal Code section 830.15.
          A K–12 public school district for use by a school police officer, as described in California Penal Code section 830.32.
          A municipal water district for use by a park ranger, as described in California Penal Code section 830.34.
          A county for use by a welfare fraud investigator or inspector, as described in California Penal Code section 830.35.
          A county for use by the coroner or the deputy coroner, as described in California Penal Code section 830.35.
          The Supreme Court and the courts of appeal for use by marshals of the Supreme Court and bailiffs of the courts of appeal, and coordinators of security for the judicial branch, as described in California Penal Code section 830.36.
          A fire department or fire protection agency of a county, city, city and county, district, or the state for use by either of the following:
          (i) A member of an arson-investigating unit, regularly paid and employed in that capacity pursuant to California Penal Code section 830.37.
          (ii) A member other than a member of an arson-investigating unit, regularly paid and employed in that capacity pursuant to California Penal Code section 830.37.
          The University of California Police Department, or the California State University Police Departments, as described in California Penal Code section 830.2.
          A California Community College police department, as described in California Penal Code section 830.32.
          A harbor or port district or other entity employing peace officers described in subdivision (b) of California Penal Code section 830.33, the San Diego Unified Port District Harbor Police, and the Harbor Department of the City of Los Angeles.
          A local agency employing park rangers described in subdivision (b) of California Penal Code section 830.31.

          Purchase, Use, and Resale Restrictions: The sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies is also permitted. However, these sworn members must have satisfactorily completed the Peace Officer Standards Training (POST) basic course or, before January 1, 2021, have satisfactorily completed the firearms portion of a training course prescribed by POST pursuant to California Penal Code section 832, and who, as a condition of carrying that handgun, complete a live-fire qualification prescribed by their employing entity at least once every six months. Sworn members of Group 2 entities may only resell or transfer a non-roster handgun to sworn members of Group 1, Group 2, or Group 3 entities. Documentation for sworn members of Group 2 to purchase may include a letter from the head of the employing agency providing: (1) the employee’s name; (2) agency name; (3) head of agency’s name, title and signature; (4) a statement that as a condition of carrying the handgun, the employee completes a live-fire qualification prescribed by the employing entity at least once every six months; and (5) a statement the employee has completed the POST basic course or, before January 1, 2021, satisfactorily completed the firearms portion of a training course prescribed by the POST. It is recommended that the letter be retained with the record of sale.

          Group 3 (for use as a service weapon):

          The California Horse Racing Board.
          The State Department of Health Care Services.
          The State Department of Public Health.
          The State Department of Social Services.
          The Department of Toxic Substances Control.
          The Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development.
          The Public Employees’ Retirement System.
          The Department of Housing and Community Development.
          Investigators of the Department of Business Oversight.
          The Law Enforcement Branch of the Office of Emergency Services.
          The California State Lottery.
          The Franchise Tax Board.

          Purchase, Use, and Resale Restrictions: THE SALE TO, PURCHASE BY, OR RESALE BY SWORN MEMBERS OF THESE AGENCIES IS NOT AUTHORIZED.

          Also Note: only sworn members of these entities who have satisfactorily completed the POST basic course or, before January 1, 2021, have satisfactorily completed the firearms portion of a training course prescribed by the POST pursuant to California Penal Code section 832, and who, as a condition of carrying that handgun, complete a live-fire qualification prescribed by their employing entity at least once every six months are permitted to use non-roster handguns as service weapons.

          Large-Capacity Magazine Exemptions

          A sworn peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal Code, or sworn federal law enforcement officer, who is authorized to carry a firearm in the course and scope of that officer’s duties may possess, borrow, purchase, receive, and import into this state a large-capacity magazine. (Pen. Code, § 32405.)

          10-Day Waiting Period Exemptions

          The waiting period described in Penal Code section 26815 does not apply to the sale, delivery, or transfer of firearms made to any person who satisfies both of the following requirements:

          The person is properly identified as a full-time paid peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2.
          The officer’s employer has authorized the officer to carry firearms while in the performance of duties. (Penal Code section 26950, subds. (a)(1) and (2).)

          Proper identification is defined as verifiable written certification from the head of the agency by which the purchaser or transferee is employed, identifying the purchaser or transferee as a peace officer who is authorized to carry firearms while in the performance of duties, and authorizing the purchase or transfer. (Pen. Code, § 26950, subd. (b)(1).)”

        • Nope, its not a joke. I posted the information but its in moderation because it contains a link to the California AG site.

          This moderation thing, its like participating in a discussion AFTER the discussion is over and everyone left.

          • I mean, you copied the entire section of the penal code in the comment, I’m sure people appreciate the citation link but you know how the spam filter works now and chose to include it anyway.

            • why yes, yes I did copy n paste the entire section of the penal code in the comment …. because, one, some people use VPN’s that give IP addresses that California blocks from seeing some portions of their gov web sites, and two, some people from outside the U.S. that read here their foreign IP’s are blocked from seeing portions of the California .gov sites and I have friends in the U.K. and Germany that read here to keep up while they are out of country and their IP’s provided by the ISP’s they are using there are blocked from seeing the California gov web site. So I, like you said, copied the entire section of the penal code in the comment, and included the link it came from so everyone was covered for viewing it.

            • Ahh, finally. Confirmation (after a few years of asking both the current and former – looking at you, DZ – management of TTAG, but never receiving an answer) that moderated comments here are blocked via manual review by a human being. We’ve endured years of “but muh WordPress auto filters” excuses.

              Now if we could only get confirmation of what those filters actually are. That question has been swept under the rug time and again.

        • Not a joke. True. It’s how I upgraded my main EDC gat from the neutered “Roster” model to the Free America version. Bought it from a LEO who was selling it for dough to help buy a more expensive match gun.

  7. Now lets just see if the full court takes and then reverses this. They tend to like to do that in my lovely little state.

    Gun laws dont have to make any sense in California, they dont even have to be obeyed since very few actually do, they just have to exist. Get caught violating one and, unless your a Biden, the process will be the punishment.

    • “the process will be the punishment.”

      Yep! They destroy your life and make an example out of you so the other serfs can see.

  8. The Ninth Circuit! Are you sure it was the Ninth Circuit? Who would ever have thought they had done something sensible for a change?

  9. It amazes me that the 9th circuit is actually upholding the constitution, in regards to 2A. It seemed for years that they would rubber stamp anything the states asked for. Then, Judge Benitez came along, and seemed to be fighting alone against the police state. Wow. How things have changed! In another lifetime or so, Californians may have their 2A rights restored!

  11. The h.om.osexu.als and ath.ei.sts who control california want you disarmed. Never forget they are s0.ciali.st pro.gressi.ve in their p0litic@l 0rien.tati0n.

Comments are closed.