A gun store in Arcadia, California, on March 15, 2020. A federal appeals court has ruled that California’s ban on selling semi-automatic weapons to adults under the age of 21 is unconstitutional.
Ringo HW Chiu / AP
hide captions
switch captions
Ringo HW Chiu / AP
A gun store in Arcadia, California, on March 15, 2020. A federal appeals court has ruled that California’s ban on selling semi-automatic weapons to adults under the age of 21 is unconstitutional.
Ringo HW Chiu / AP
A US appeals court ruled Wednesday that California’s ban on selling semi-automatic weapons to adults under the age of 21 is unconstitutional.
In the 2-1 ruling, a panel of the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals based in San Francisco said Wednesday the law violates 2nd Amendment rights to bear arms and the San Diego judge should have blocked what it called a “nearly complete ban on semi-automatic central-fire rifles” for youth. “America would not exist without the heroism of the young people who fought and died in our revolutionary army,” Judge Ryan Nelson wrote. “We reaffirm today that our Constitution still protects the right that allowed them to die: the right of young people to keep and bear arms.”
The Arms Policy Coalition, which brought the case, said the ruling makes for optimistic age-based gun bans to be overturned in other courts.
However, the ruling was not an all-out victory for gun rights advocates.
They sought to prevent the state from requiring a hunting license for the purchase of rifles or handguns by adults under the age of 21 who are not part of the military or law enforcement.
The sale of handguns to people under the age of 21 was banned when the requirement for a hunting license was passed in 2018 after some of the nation’s worst mass shootings were committed by youth users. rifles, including the Valentine’s Day murder at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
The court ruled the hunting license request was reasonable to enhance public safety through “reasonable gun control.”
In 2019, the state passed additional legislation banning the sale of semi-automatic central firing rifles to anyone under the age of 21.
Matthew Jones, a 20-year-old at the time from Santee in San Diego County, was the lead plaintiff in the case. He said he wanted a gun for self-defense and other legal purposes but did not want a hunting license.
His lawsuit, filed before the ban on the purchase of semi-automatic weapons under age, was amended to challenge that law and the hunting license requirement.
The suit said the state had “shortened (“exempted”) the hunting license that was not applicable and irrelevant — the only exemption even possible for a normal, law-abiding young man. , who don’t want to get into a very dangerous profession of law enforcement or the military – by banning entire weapons. “
The two judges ruled with a majority as part of President Donald Trump’s wave of nominations of conservative candidates approved to the prominent liberal court.
A dissent was written by Judge Sidney Stein of the United States District Court, who was appointed to the panel from the Southern District of New York. Stein was nominated by President Bill Clinton to the lower court.
Democratic Senator Anthony Portantino of La Cañada Flintridge, who wrote both laws, said he was disappointed that the ban on semi-autos had been rescinded but pleased that the requirement for a hunting license persisted.
“I remain committed to keeping deadly weapons out of the wrong hands,” Portantino said. “Safety for students on our campus is something we should all come together for, and proper gun control is part of that solution.”
Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office said it was reviewing the decision. In a statement, a spokesperson said it was committed to “protecting California’s conventional gun laws.”
