Judge Blocks California Law Requiring Safety Features For Handguns

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Judge blocks California law requiring safety features for handguns

A federal judge on Monday blocked California from enforcing a state law requiring new semiautomatic handguns to have certain safety features, finding it violates the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney in Santa Anna, California is the latest in a line of decisions striking down state gun laws following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year expanding gun rights. The judge said it would not take effect for 14 days to give the state a chance to appeal.

The California Rifle & Pistol Association and four individuals sued the state last year to challenge the law. The association hailed the ruling while the office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta did not immediately respond to a request for comment...

Chuck Michel, president of the California association, said: "If we can hold on to this great Second Amendment win, people will be able to choose from among thousands of the latest, greatest and safest handguns made today."

[Oceanbob]

Hopefully the stupid roster will go away?‼️‼️‼️

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Hopefully the stupid roster will go away?‼️‼️‼️

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the 9th Circuit to back him/us up.

Post #291 from... 2022 08 01 Boland V Bonta - Handgun Roster Lawsuit...

Here we go boys!

https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...747.60.0_1.pdf

From that link...

...In this case, Plaintiffs Lance Boland, Mario Santellan, Reno May, Jerome Schammel, and California Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated, allege that the UHA?s CLI, MDM, and microstamping requirements are unconstitutional, contending that they violate the Second Amendment under Bruen. Before the Court is Plaintiffs? motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining California from enforcing those requirements. (Dkt. 23 [Motion for Preliminary Injunction, hereinafter ?Mot.?].) Because the plain text of the Second Amendment covers Plaintiffs? proposed course of conduct of purchasing state-of-the-art handguns, and the UHA?s CLI, MDM, and microstamping requirements are not consistent with this Nation?s historical tradition of firearm regulation, Plaintiffs? motion is GRANTED...

The microstamping requirement has prevented any new handgun models from being added to the Roster since May 2013. Although the California Department of Justice certified on May 17, 2013 that the technology used to create the imprint is available to more than one manufacturer unencumbered by any patent restrictions, the technology still was not available. See Nat?l Shooting Sports Found., Inc. v. State, 420 P.3d 870, 872 (Cal. 2018) (noting the government?s concession that the certification did not confirm ?the availability of the technology itself?). Indeed, to this day, a decade after the requirement took effect, no firearm manufacturer in the world makes a firearm with this capability. (See Tr. at 77 [Salam Fatohi testifying that no commercial manufacturer has ever produced a handgun with microstamping technology]; id. at 114 [Michael Beddow testifying that he was not aware of efforts by firearm manufacturers to implement microstamping]).)

As a result, none of the 832 Roster listings meets the current definition of a handgun that is not ?unsafe.? (See Tr. at 180 [Special Agent Gonzalez testifying that no
handgun with microstamping has been added to the Roster].) Not one of the handguns currently being sold in California has a CLI, MDM, and microstamping ability. (See id.) Every single handgun on the Roster is a grandfathered handgun?one the California legislature now deems ?unsafe.? (See id.)...

Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the UHA?s CLI, MDM, and microstamping requirements violate the Second Amendment of the United
States Constitution...

Put differently, under the UHA, Californians must rely for self-defense on handguns brought to market more than a decade ago. Since 2007, when the CLI and MDM requirements were added to the UHA, only 32 new semiautomatic firearms have been added to the Roster of over 800 handguns. (Tr. at 179 [Special Agent Gonzalez].)
Not a single new semiautomatic handgun has been added to the Roster since May 2013, when the microstamping requirement was implemented. (See id.) Requiring Californians to purchase only outdated handguns for self-defense without question infringes their right to keep and bear arms...

Californians have the constitutional right to acquire and use state-of-the-art handguns to protect themselves. They should not be forced to settle for decade-old models of handguns to ensure that they remain safe inside or outside the home. But unfortunately, the UHA?s CLI, MDM, and microstamping requirements do exactly that. Because enforcing those requirements implicates the plain text of the Second Amendment, and the government fails to point to any well-established historical analogues that are consistent with them, those requirements are unconstitutional and their enforcement must be preliminarily enjoined. Accordingly, Plaintiffs? motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED...

[Capybara]

I have a feeling the Roster won't go away but the requirements to place a handgun on the Roster will become much easier. No more LCI, Mag Disconnect or Microstamping. Of course, once Renna v. Bonta is ruled on, that could change the whole equation.

[The Gleam]

Hopefully the stupid roster will go away?‼️‼️‼️

No, not at this time. Roster still in force, injunction against the microstamping, LCI, and magazine disconnect requirements only - not to take force for 14 days at the earliest.

Anything not on the Roster still cannot be sold/bought in CA from dealer inventory, or imported, unless buyer is exempt. Anything no longer in production is not likely ever going to get on the Roster, regardless of these 'feature' obstacles being removed.

Plenty of details in the 'real' thread on this issue, which oddly - so few people ever visit that forum.

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=27710266#post27710266

--

[TrappedinCalifornia]

No, not at this time. Roster still in force, injunction against the microstamping, LCI, and magazine disconnect requirements only - not to take force for 14 days at the earliest.

Anything not on the Roster still cannot be sold/bought in CA from dealer inventory, or imported, unless buyer is exempt. Anything no longer in production is not likely ever going to get on the Roster, regardless of these 'feature' obstacles being removed.

Plenty of details in the 'real' thread on this issue, which oddly - so few people ever visit that forum.

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=27710266#post27710266

--

You linked to the wrong post. It's Post #291, not Post #438 where the update starts.

All of these are 'real' threads and, as you noted, not everyone visits the other forum sections; including General Guns, OT, 2nd Amendment, and this one. As I said, the moderators are going to have to sort it out; but, it's not the first time such 'news' has landed in multiple forum sections.

[The Gleam]

You linked to the wrong post. It's Post #291, not Post #438 where the update starts.

All of these are 'real' threads and, as you noted, not everyone visits the other forum sections; including General Guns, OT, 2nd Amendment, and this one. As I said, the moderators are going to have to sort it out; but, it's not the first time such 'news' has landed in multiple forum sections.

Nonsense.

I hope people are not so troglodyte, that they can't actually scroll forward or back to getbthe gist.

The 'Real' thread has been around for several months - everything anyone needs to know is being posted there, and the history of it, all answers at the tip of the finger - and the most informative.

All you are doing is posting links to articles and little more than that - repetitive, and they leave a lot to be desired.

All these links to Yahoo/Reuters articles you keep posting are convoluting the report of it, and confusing the typical apathetic gun owners who only come here after they have already read the news article you posted from Yahoo/Reuters.

FULL REAL THREAD for the unsophisticated:

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1810709

---

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Nonsense.

I hope people are not so troglodyte, that they can't actually scroll forward or back to getbthe gist.

The 'Real' thread has been around for several months - everything anyone needs to know is being posted there, and the history of it, all answers at the tip of the finger - and the most informative.

All you are doing is posting links to articles and little more than that - repetitive, and they leave a lot to be desired.

All these links to Yahoo/Reuters articles you keep posting are convoluting the report of it, and confusing the typical apathetic gun owners who only come here after they have already read the news article you posted from Yahoo/Reuters.

FULL REAL THREAD for the unsophisticated:

https://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1810709

---

Sigh.

As I've said, let the moderators sort it out and stop attempting to negate threads because you prefer a version in a different section.

As you said elsewhere, we're (give or take) on the same page. Let it go at that and celebrate the win.

[Librarian]

Moved to the correct forum, and closed as duplicate.

Not to worry - this happens every time we get a favorable court ruling.