With the Washington State Supreme Court preparing to consider the constitutionality of a state law banning firearms magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) on Monday filed an amicus brief with the court supporting the challenge.
At issue in the case, State of Washington v. Gator’s Custom Guns, et al., is whether the state can prohibit ownership, sale and use of standard-capacity magazines that come stock with the vast majority of semi-auto firearms on the market today. Washington’s law prohibits such magazines.
“Under the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, Washington’s attempt to punish a gun store for selling magazines that are commonly used must fail,” the brief argued. “Bruen unequivocally reaffirmed what District of Columbia v. Heller taught: All instruments that compose bearable ‘arms’ are covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment. That certainly includes the magazines which are necessary for the proper functioning of a firearm.”
The brief further stated: “By artificially limiting how many rounds a firearm can store and expel without reloading, the State has restricted conduct covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment and so the challenged law is unconstitutional unless the State can prove its regulation is justified by a historical exception.”
According to the brief, the state wasn’t able to meet that requirement in the lower courts.
“It has not done so,” the brief continued. “Here again, Bruen and Heller speak in one voice. As a matter of history, arms in common use for lawful purposes, such as self-defense or target practice, are protected and their possession and use cannot be banned—full stop. There can be no question whatsoever that magazines that can hold more than ten rounds are overwhelmingly common. That requires affirming the district court’s judgment.”
Indeed, as the brief further explained, the state doesn’t have a leg to stand on in arguing for the magazine ban.
“The only historical tradition that could plausibly justify restricting magazines with greater than 10 rounds is the prohibition on the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’ But Washington’s law cannot be justified by this historical tradition because magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds are ‘commonly possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.’ Thus, they are not the type of ‘dangerous and unusual’ weapons that are a mark of impending criminal violence.”
Brand Combs, FPC president said in a news release that the Washington Supreme Court must overturn the law because of both constitutional and U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
“Immoral bans on standard firearm magazines must be put to an end,” Combs said. “The Washington Supreme Court should follow the Constitution and binding Supreme Court precedent and enjoin enforcement of this unconstitutional law.”
I have little faith in the SCOTUS any more. They will likely stab us in the back. We will need to take things into our own hands if we want to preserve our God-given rights.
Little early for that outlook but never too early for such preparation.
No government wants its citizens armed, they only want other nation’s citizens armed. Armed citizenry can overthrow its government. Governments hate being overthrown.
Not SCOTUS, it’s the Washington State Supreme Court, which is known for its liberal bent.
Of course. That’s why I didn’t even consider them as anything but a weigh station on the way to SCOTUS. No need to mention them at all, as they are just anti-2A rubber-stampers on the way to the main event.
Good luck with that. Always seems the former AG and now governor Ferguson has an inside line to the radical state Supreme Court.
The kicker is the strong constitutional Washington State Constitution Article 1, Section 24 states that the right to bear arms in defense of oneself or the state cannot be impaired.
Some people dont like other people to have a lot of bullets
I hope that in arguments the claim to these magazines serving no self defense purpose is put to question by “why do police officers need carve outs then?”
When it comes to seeing you and yours are prepared to deal with hardcore violent criminals most of the so called judges have the mind of Jabba the Hut. They’ll say in the old days muskets could only be fired one round at a time. A good 2A attorney will explain how in the days of slow firing muskets citizens used musket Black Powder to construct bombs…Surely the court knows to keep Powder Horns away from flames? Nonetheless in the musket days there were some auto loading designs and firearms to fill the need for a few to stand against many. Therefore the framers and musket owners who fought Red Coats, dealt with the wilderness and violent criminals would not impose upon themselves any limits on ammunition, etc.
A well-written brief. Unfortunately, the state supreme court will blow their collective noses on it and carry on with the ban. This will need to be kicked up the the US Supreme Court to get any traction, and even then has to fight it’s way through the Ninth first. It’s gonna be a long haul…..
But one with a lot of similar cases all throughout the process across multiple jurisdictions. Lot more to work with now as compared to just after Bruen.
And the Supreme Court says 5gazzallion round mags are okay and the states that want to say Not Here.
And then,,,,,,
Back in the 80s Wa was an awesome state. Them they imported hordes of aliens (from Kommiefornia). Ruined the entire place (or Western/Puget sound area). I wouldn’t even go visit it today.
Remember that this is the same state supreme court that disallowed the car tab ballot to be dismissed even though they admitted that it was by law met the requirements and was a valid proposition because it would be ‘hard’ on the counties and municipal governments lossing that dash cow, but the recent gun disarmament proposition when challenged in the courts as not meeting the requirements and therefore not eligible to be placed on the ballots was ‘allowed’ with the argument that it served the greater good by cracking down those evil guns… if they cannot even follow their own laws for propositions, how do they thing they will rule on obvious anti 2nd amendment violations?
So that means everyone is going to be walking around with 50 10 round magazines, one in the gun and 49 in a back pack
Or just more 45acp, 10mm, 40sw/357 Sig to make the most of otherwise wasted space. Or what we see in states (and previously during the AWB decade).
Comments are closed.