Jaymes et al vs Maduros, CRPA suit against 11% Excise Tax, July 2 2024

[Librarian]

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/7700/attachments/original/1719974186/Jaymes_v_Maduros_Complaint.pdf?1719974186

DANIELLE JAYMES, JOSHUAH GERKEN,
SECOND AMENDMENT FOUNDATION,
FIREARMS POLICY COALITION,
CALIFORNIA RIFLE & PISTOL
ASSOCIATION, and NATIONAL RIFLE
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA,
Plaintiffs,
v.
NICOLAS MADUROS, in his official capacity
as Director of the California Department of Tax
and Fee Administration,
Defendant.

[Preston-CLB]

And...Here we go!

Let's help CRPA fight this BS! Please donate!
-P

[The Gleam]

I think they could have also cited that California lacks a legitimate energency or unique special circumstance as a state where collecting such a tax is justified, or even the outlet to which they intend to apply the benefits of the collected tax is of a necessary and meaningful measure that directly benefits those who paid the tax.

That was the same consideration applied when California was trying to apply a special tax on truck drivers entering/leaving CA years ago. CA couldn't show a special and unique circumstance or extraordinary emergency that justified the tax, so the courts tossed it.

And an injunction against collecting the tax should be immediately put in force to avoid an unjust 'taking' while this is being hashed out in court, no different than the injunction of taking/confiscation of legally owned high-capacity magazines was blocked, as that junk legislation to ban mere possession makes its way through the courts.

---

[splithoof]

[WithinReason]

And...Here we go!

Let's help CRPA fight this BS! Please donate!
-P

Agreed. I joined CRPA a few years ago, and I will become a senior life member next year. We should support the organizations supporting our constitutional rights.

[abinsinia]

[cz74]

Others have already said the state will defend this tax by bringing up Pittman-Robertson. Will be interesting to see how we proceed in this fight.

[Sgt Raven]

I haven't thought about California general tax regulations for 10-15 years.
Wasn't there a Prop where they have to get 2/3rds vote for new or increase in taxes?

[BigMac90660]

I haven't thought about California general tax regulations for 10-15 years.
Wasn't there a Prop where they have to get 2/3rds vote for new or increase in taxes?

Newsom got a crooked judge to remove the proposition from the ballot. Think he said it was undemocratic.

[CitaDeL]

Make tar and feathers great again.

[Sgt Raven]

Newsom got a crooked judge to remove the proposition from the ballot. Think he said it was undemocratic.

No I'm thinking of an older one from before 1995 but newer than 1980.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I haven't thought about California general tax regulations for 10-15 years.
Wasn't there a Prop where they have to get 2/3rds vote for new or increase in taxes?

Proposition 62 (1986) maybe?

[Sgt Raven]

Proposition 62 (1986) maybe?

That might be what was tickling my memory.
I know starting with Prop 13 property taxes, we have been trying to put a straight jacket on our tax laws.

[MountainLion]

Newsom got a crooked judge to remove the proposition from the ballot. Think he said it was undemocratic.

Correction: It was not Newsom, and it was not one judge. The California Supreme Court removed it from the ballot, because it was drafted using the wrong procedure. The proposition claimed to amend the California constitution, which can be done solely by the voters. The court decided that it revised the constitution (note the difference between amend and revise), which has to be started by the legislature. The proponents of the measure could amend this decision to the US Supreme Court, but I don't think they have done so. Even if they did, it would be very unlikely that SCOTUS would address it. But it would be interesting to see what SCOTUS would do in this case.

[CALI-gula]

Calguns has really fallen hard. If this had been any time between 2006 - 2016, there would have been over 300 posts in this thread by now discussing it, angles of approach, detailed legal explanation and potential other methods for attack.

Seems like nobody cares anymore.

I have to wonder how much of the apathy is caused by;

1) proactive gun owners leaving California,
2) older more proactive gun owners that gave a damn are now dying off,
3) the challenges of posting on Calguns over the past year prior to the update caused many previous members to bail on Calguns for good,
4) the update itself not being as user-friendly as the old version had been causing many previous members to bail on Calguns for good,
5) the anti-NRA crowd finally got their wish of neutering the NRA, which has helped expand a stigma of gun ownership in general, whether you like or hate WLP, and whether he had any influence in that or not,
6) or California politicians finally gaining traction with younger generations in brain-washing them through their anti-gun marketing campaigns, to get them to willingly and voluntarily eschew their 2nd Amendment civil-rights and abhor firearms, trading gun ownership, culpability, and independence for surrogate pursuits of weed, porn, video-games, transgender/DEI-games, climate-change blame, student loan 'forgiveness', support for Hamas/Hezbollah, socialism, welfare, passivity and plenty of other false, vacuous parasitic endeavors that government is all to willing to help them be saddled with.

.