In NSSF v. Bonta, U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Schopler has granted a Preliminary Injunction prohibiting the enforcement of California’s AB 1594 law that exposes firearm industry members to lawsuits in California for activities outside the state of California. The ruling by Federal Judge Schopler enjoined the enforcement of California AB 1594, the so-called “Firearm Industry Responsibility Act”. In 2023 the NSSF sued to challenge the law and moved for an injunction. In granting the injunction, Judge Schopler found that AB 1594 is likely unconstitutional because it violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution and the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
“We are thankful the court enjoined the state from suing members of the firearm industry under this unconstitutional law that attempts to use the real threat of liability on commerce beyond California’s borders and impose its policy choices on its sister states”, stated NSSF Senior VP and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane. CLICK HERE for more details of NSSF v. Bonta legal case.
NSSF Opposes Unconstitutional California Firearm Industry Liability Law
NSSF argued that California’s firearm industry liability law is preempted by the Federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) which was passed with bipartisan support in Congress and subsequently signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2005. The PLCAA was specifically enacted to stamp out frivolous lawsuits sought by activist politicians, gun control lawyers and greedy trial lawyers seeking to bankrupt the lawful firearm industry by blaming them and their lawfully-sold and non-defective products for the violence and harm caused by criminals who misuse firearms to commit their crimes.
“It’s no surprise California’s rabidly antigun General Assembly would pass and Governor Gavin Newsom would sign into law a blatantly unconstitutional attack on the lawful firearm industry instead of looking in the mirror to see how their own policies are leading to historic levels of criminal violence and endangering law-abiding and innocent Californians every day,” said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane. “NSSF will not stand by and allow the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans … to be trampled upon while criminals committing acts of violence are handled with kid gloves by soft-on-crime prosecutors. California’s industry liability law is in blatant defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen and is preempted by the PLCAA.”
Among other provisions, California AB 1594 bans the manufacture, sale and marketing of firearms the state deems “abnormally dangerous”. It allows civil lawsuits against a firearm industry member to be filed by the Attorney General, any municipality and any person who claims to have suffered harm from the misuse of a legal, lawfully sold firearm by a remote third party. The law unconstitutionally invades the sovereignty of sister States by directly regulating lawful commerce occurring entirely outside the state of California in violation of the Commerce Clause and the United States’ system of federalism. The law also violates the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) enacted by Congress in 2005 to stop just these sorts of frivolous lawsuits against members of the industry.
The NSSF argues that AB 1594 also directely linfringes on the Second Amendment and chills First Amendment rights by restricting protected free-speech advertising of Constitutionally-protected products that are lawfully made and sold — even when that advertising takes place outside of California’s borders.
Share the post "NSSF Wins Injunction Against Unconstitutional California AB 1594"
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is challenging California’s firearm industry liability law, AB 1594, passed in 2022 and signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law, which goes into effect on July 23, 2023, encourages civil suits against the firearm industry for the illegal actions of criminals with guns. This law is an affront to the U.S. Constitution and is an attempt to circumvent the will of the U.S. Congress when it passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).
The litigation, NSSF v. Bonta, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The NSSF now seeks a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of AB 1594 as challenges to the unconstitutional law progress through the courts.
NSSF Files Motion to Enjoin Unconstitutional California Firearm Industry Liability Law
The NSSF filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in its legal challenge, NSSF v. Bonta, seeking to enjoin California’s firearm industry liability law, AB 1594. The unconstitutional law permits and encourages civil suits against members of the firearm industry for the damages/injuries caused by the actions of criminals. The law goes into effect next month on 7/23/23.
NSSF’s motion argues that California’s firearm industry liability law is preempted by the Federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) which was passed with bipartisan support in Congress and subsequently signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2005. The PLCAA was specifically enacted to stamp out frivolous lawsuits sought by activist politicians, gun control lawyers and greedy trial lawyers seeking to bankrupt the lawful firearm industry by blaming them and their lawfully-sold and non-defective products for the violence and harm caused by criminals who misuse firearms to commit their crimes.
“It’s no surprise California’s rabidly antigun General Assembly would pass and Governor Gavin Newsom would sign into law a blatantly unconstitutional attack on the lawful firearm industry instead of looking in the mirror to see how their own policies are leading to historic levels of criminal violence and endangering law-abiding and innocent Californians every day,” said NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel Lawrence G. Keane. “NSSF will not stand by and allow the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans … to be trampled upon while criminals committing acts of violence are handled with kid gloves by soft-on-crime prosecutors. California’s industry liability law is in blatant defiance of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen and is preempted by the PLCAA.”
In addition to the firearm industry liability provision, California’s AB 1594 bans the manufacture, sale, and marketing of firearms the state deems “abnormally dangerous” regardless of if they are commonly-owned. It allows civil lawsuits against a firearm industry member to be filed by a person who has suffered harm in California, the Attorney General, or even city or county attorneys for the harm caused by the criminal misuse of a firearm by a remote third party. The law unconstitutionally invades the sovereignty of sister states by directly regulating lawful commerce occurring entirely and wholly outside the state of California in violation of the Commerce Clause and the United States system of federalism.
NSSF’s challenge explains that AB 1594 is a law that was drafted prior to the Bruen decision and signed just weeks AFTER the Supreme Court published the landmark ruling. Rather than re-examining the legislation to ensure AB 1594 complied with Supreme Court precedent, California legislators ignored the Supreme Court’s decision and pushed AB 1594 through defiantly.
The NSSF argues that AB 1594 not only infringes on Second Amendment rights but chills First Amendment rights by restricting advertising of Constitutionally-protected products that are lawfully made and sold — even when that advertising takes place outside of California’s borders.
Share the post "NSSF Seeks Injunction Against Radical California AB 1594 Law"
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is challenging California’s firearm industry liability law, AB 1594, passed in 2022 and signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law, which goes into effect on July 23, 2023, encourages civil suits against the firearm industry for the illegal actions of criminals with guns. This law is an affront to the U.S. Constitution and is an attempt to circumvent the will of the U.S. Congress when it passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).
The litigation, NSSF v. Bonta, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The NSSF now seeks a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of the unconstitutional law as challenges to AB 1594 progress through the courts.
“California’s General Assembly and Governor Newsom made a spectacle of defying the U.S. Supreme Court’s Bruen decision when this bill was passed and enacted,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “This law is openly hostile to the firearm industry and also defiant to Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court and the Constitution. Governor Newsom [seeks] to exert California’s radical gun control agenda across the United States. NSSF will defend our Constitutionally-protected industry against the broadsides of this extremist agenda.”
NSSF’s challenge explains that AB 1594, misleadingly titled the “Firearm Industry Responsibility Act,” is a law that was drafted prior to the Bruen decision and signed just weeks after the Supreme Court published the landmark ruling. Rather than re-examining the legislation to ensure it complied with Supreme Court precedent, Gov. Newsom forged ahead, challenging the ruling when he signed it.
The law bans the manufacture, sale and marketing of firearms the state deems “abnormally dangerous” regardless if they are commonly-owned. It also encourages civil lawsuits by a person who has suffered harm in California, the Attorney General, or city or county attorneys against a firearm industry member for the harm caused by the criminal misuse of a firearm by a remote third party. This is expressly prohibited by PLCAA. The law unconstitutionally invades the sovereignty of sister states by directly regulating lawful commerce occurring entirely and wholly outside the state of California in violation of the Commerce Clause and our system of federalism.
The NSSF argues that AB 1594 not only infringes on Second Amendment rights but chills First Amendment rights by restricting advertising of Constitutionally-protected products that are lawfully made and sold — even when that advertising takes place outside of California’s borders.
California’s AB 1594 is clearly unconstitutional on several fronts.
Share the post "NSSF Challenges CA Law Promoting Lawsuits vs. Gun Makers"
Editor: The following statement was released by Leupold & Stevens Inc. on August 3, 2016. We publish the statement as it was released, without modification.
Leupold® Files Lawsuit Against Nightforce Over Patent Violations
Leupold & Stevens, Inc., has filed a civil suit in the U.S. District Court of Oregon alleging patent violations by Lightforce U.S.A., doing business as Nightforce. In the suit, Leupold & Stevens, Inc., alleges that Nightforce is marketing and selling products that infringe on a variety of patents owned by Leupold & Stevens, Inc. and is seeking all available remedies.
The lawsuit is based on six patents for riflescope adjustments, internal optical mechanisms, and flip covers.
Leupold & Stevens, Inc., has been pioneering riflescope and sporting optics technology since 1947, when it developed a non-fogging riflescope charged with nitrogen. Today, Leupold® has been granted over 151 patents and design registrations in 18 countries, representing Leupold’s continued commitment to innovation and development of sports optics. For more information on Leupold products, please visit us at www.leupold.com.
Leupold & Stevens, Inc. is committed to protecting its intellectual property and the innovations developed by its engineering and design teams.
Founded in Oregon more than a century ago, Leupold & Stevens, Inc. is a fifth generation, family owned company that designs, machines and assembles its riflescopes, mounting systems and tactical/Gold Ring® spotting scopes in the USA. The product lines include rifle, handgun and spotting scopes; binoculars; rangefinders; mounting systems; and optical tools, accessories and Pro Gear.
Initial Response from Nightforce Optics
We contacted Nightforce Optics regarding the legal action commenced by Leupold. A spokesman for Nightforce provided this response: “We have investigated [Leupold’s] claims and we are confident there is no infringement. We look forward to full and fair competition with Leupold in the future.”
Share the post "Leupold Files Federal Lawsuit Over Claimed Patent Violations"
