Second Modification
In problem by Olympian, ninth Circuit strikes down regulation requiring background checks to purchase ammunition
July 28, 2025, 10:22 am CDT
A California regulation requiring background checks to purchase ammunition violates the Second Modification, the ninth U.S. Circuit Court docket of Appeals at San Francisco dominated final week in a 2-1 choice. (Picture from Shutterstock)
A California regulation requiring background checks to purchase ammunition violates the Second Modification, the ninth U.S. Circuit Court docket of Appeals at San Francisco dominated final week in a 2-1 choice.
The appeals courtroom affirmed a everlasting injunction barring enforcement in a July 24 choice by ninth Circuit Decide Sandra S. Ikuta. She is an appointee of former President George W. Bush, as is ninth Circuit Decide Jay S. Bybee, the dissenting decide.
The lead plaintiff within the case is Kim Rhode, who has received Olympic medals for lure and skeet capturing. The California Rifle & Pistol Affiliation can be one of many plaintiffs.
The California regulation is unconstitutional on its face, Ikuta stated, as a result of it’s not per the nation’s historic custom of firearm regulation, a constitutional requirement underneath the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court docket choice in New York State Rifle & Pistol Affiliation Inc. v. Bruen.
The bulk stated California’s cited historic examples weren’t “relevantly comparable” to California’s ammunition background checks or didn’t occur within the related timeframe.
Examples cited by California included loyalist disarmament provisions, concealed-carry allowing necessities, surety legal guidelines imposed on doubtlessly harmful individuals, and licensing necessities for gunpowder and firearms distributors.
The bulk reached the historic query after holding that the regulation implicates the plain textual content of the Second Modification underneath the primary prong of the two-step Bruen evaluation.
In his dissent, Bybee stated the bulk “successfully abrogates Bruen’s first step” in a “boundless interpretation of the Second Modification.”
“California’s regulation—which, on its face, imposes no delay, and a mere one-dollar payment—just isn’t the form of heavy-handed regulation that meaningfully constrains the precise to maintain and bear arms,” he wrote.
Reuters and Regulation.com have protection of the choice, Rhode v. Bonta.
See additionally:
ABA helps common background checks, different proposals to curb gun violence, lawmakers advised
Write a letter to the editor, share a narrative tip or replace, or report an error.
