Big Gun Rights Victory in California One-Gun-A-Month Challenge

In the case of Nguyen v. Bonta, plaintiffs have been granted summary judgment in a federal challenge of California’s One-Gun-A-Month (OGM) purchase law. This is a major win for gun rights in California. Under current California law, even after passing multiple background checks, a California citizen may only purchase one firearm every 30 days. This violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, argued plaintiffs lead by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). U.S. District Judge William Q. Hayes agreed, granting plaintiffs summary judgement, which is essentially a case victory based on legal principles. However, Judge Hayes, stayed his decision for 30 days to allow defendants to appeal. The case will probably be appealed by California to the liberal-leaning 9th Circuit.

In his 24-page decision, Federal District Court Judge Hayes wrote, “Defendants have not met their burden of producing a ‘well-established and representative historical analogue’ to the OGM law. The Court therefore concludes that Plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgment as to the constitutionality of the OGM law under the Second Amendment.”

“The state of California tried to justify the OGM law in part on the grounds that it is a lawful regulation imposing conditions on the commercial sale of arms,” noted SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “However, there is nothing in the Second Amendment remotely connected to limiting the number of firearms a person can purchase. This limitation is blatantly unconstitutional, and if this ruling is appealed by the State of California, we intend to defend the lower court’s correct decision.”

“This is a win for gun rights and California gun owners”, said Alan M. Gottlieb, SAF founder and Executive Vice President. “There is no historical justification for limiting law-abiding citizens to a single handgun or rifle purchase during a one-month period, and Judge Hayes’ ruling clearly points that out.”

SAF is joined by the North County Shooting Center, San Diego County Gun Owners Pac, PWGG, LP, Firearms Policy Coalition and six private citizens including Michelle Nguyen, for whom the case is named. They are represented by attorney Raymond M. DiGuiseppe of Southport, N.C. The case was filed in December 2020 and is known as Nguyen v. Bonta.

Similar Posts:

• California Gun Waiting Period Laws Ruled Unconstitutional
• California Microstamping Requirement Upheld in Court
• Landmark Gun Rights Case Headed to U.S. Supreme Court
• Federal Judge Strikes Down Chicago Ban on Firearms Sales
• Maryland Gun Law Ruling — ‘Strict Scrutiny’ Should Apply

Tags: 2nd Amendment, Constitutional Law, Nguyen v. Bonta, SAF, Second Amendment