9th Circuit Strikes Down California Age-Based Semi-automatic Rifle Ban
California young adults (18 to 20 years) can now own a semi-auto rifle such as this Browning for hunting, self defense, and target shooting. The 9th Circuit struck down a California law as unconstitutional.
Report from Second Amendment Foundation (SAF)
On May 11, 2022, A three-judge panel for the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a California prohibition on sales of semi-automatic rifles to 18- to 20-year-old young adults. The 9th Circuit then remanded the case, Jones v. Bonta, back to the District Court for further proceedings. This ruling is a major victory for firearms rights. The fight against California’s unconstitutional restriction was led by a coalition of Second Amendment advocate groups.
In this legal action, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), was joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., Firearms Policy Foundation, Calguns Foundation, Poway Weapons and Gear and PWG Range, North County Shooting Center, Inc, Beebe Family Arms and Munitions, and three private citizens, including Matthew Jones for whom the case is named. Download Jones v. Bonta PDF.
The majority opinion was written by Judge Ryan Nelson and joined by Judge Kenneth Lee, both Donald Trump appointees, and in part by Judge Sidney Stein from the Southern District of New York, a Bill Clinton appointee. Judge Stein also dissented in part.
Writing for the majority, Judge Nelson observed, “(T)he Second Amendment protects the right of young adults to keep and bear arms, which includes the right to purchase them. The district court reasoned otherwise and held that the laws did not burden Second Amendment rights at all: that was legal error…(T)he district court erred by applying intermediate scrutiny, rather than strict scrutiny, to the semiautomatic centerfire rifle ban. And even under intermediate scrutiny, this ban likely violates the Second Amendment because it fails the ‘reasonable fit’ test.”
“We are delighted with the opinion,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The court majority rightly recognized that delaying the exercise of a right until age 21 does irreparable harm. It also applied strict scrutiny to the semi-auto ban.”
Gottlieb noted this ruling could have an impact on another case challenging a similar prohibition in Washington State, which is also part of the Ninth Circuit. There, the prohibition was adopted via a citizen initiative in 2018, and was challenged by SAF and the National Rifle Association. ABA Journal related article.
“America would not exist without the heroism of the young adults who fought and died in our revolutionary army,” wrote Judge Ryan Nelson in his majority opinion.
“Today, we reaffirm that our Constitution still protects the right that enabled their sacrifice: the right of young adults to keep and bear arms,” Nelson wrote.
Jones v. Bonta, 9th Circuit Ruling:
In Nordyke v. King, the plaintiffs challenged an Alameda County ordinance that effectively prevented plaintiffs from holding a gun show at the Alameda Fairgrounds. Though the 9th Circuit acknowledged the existence of rights under the Second Amendment, the three-judge panel concluded that D.C. v. Heller was limited in scope, and only recognized a right of “armed self-defense in the home”. Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit ruled against plaintfiffs, and upheld the Alameda County ordinance, which banned possession of guns “on county property.” Disturbingly, the Ninth Circuit ruling attempts to carve out a “public property” exception to the Second Amendment. The Nordyke v. King opinion states that a gun ban on county property: “fits within the exception from the Second Amendment for ‘sensitive places’ that Heller recognized.”
