Tweet
Update 8/15/14:
This is the latest update in the NRA/CRPAF case that overturned AB 962, which would have mandated thumb printing and registration, and banned online sales of "handgun ammunition" as vaguely defined by the statutes. The statutes were held unconstitutionally vague and permanently enjoined by the trial court and again by the CA Court of Appeal. In addition to striking down AB 962 on its face, this case is significant and has larger big picture implications. Specifically, the decision by the California Court of Appeals was the first opinion in the nation to recognize that laws that regulate Second Amendment conduct must provide heightened levels of clarity to prevent them from being stricken as unconstitutionally vague, irrespective of whether the laws actually violate the Second Amendment.
Earlier this year, the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and briefing is now in progress.
The state filed its opening brief on May 6.
Our office filed Respondents' Brief on Monday, August 18.
All filings to date in the case can be viewed here.
The State's Reply brief is due next month.
Oral arguments are expected to take place in late 2014 or early 2015.
-Clint
Previous update from early 2014:
Last month, the State filed its Petition for Review by the California Supreme Court:
On Friday, January 10, our office filed an answer / opposition to that petition:
Here is the link to the current Court of Appeal Opinion:
This is the latest update in the NRA/CRPAF case that overturned AB 962, which would have mandated thumb printing and registration, and banned online sales of "handgun ammunition" as vaguely defined by the statutes. The statutes were held unconstitutionally vague and permanently enjoined by the trial court and again by the CA Court of Appeal. In addition to striking down AB 962 on its face, this case is significant and has larger big picture implications. Specifically, the decision by the California Court of Appeals was the first opinion in the nation to recognize that laws that regulate Second Amendment conduct must provide heightened levels of clarity to prevent them from being stricken as unconstitutionally vague, irrespective of whether the laws actually violate the Second Amendment.
Earlier this year, the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and briefing is now in progress.
The state filed its opening brief on May 6.
Our office filed Respondents' Brief on Monday, August 18.
All filings to date in the case can be viewed here.
The State's Reply brief is due next month.
Oral arguments are expected to take place in late 2014 or early 2015.
-Clint
Previous update from early 2014:
Last month, the State filed its Petition for Review by the California Supreme Court:
On Friday, January 10, our office filed an answer / opposition to that petition:
Here is the link to the current Court of Appeal Opinion:
Comment