California’s Gun Purchase Restriction Temporarily Lifted

A recent court decision has temporarily suspended California’s law limiting firearm purchases to one per month. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a unanimous decision by a three-judge panel, blocked the enforcement of this restriction while the case is under review.

This ruling overturns a previous stay on a lower court’s decision that found the law unconstitutional. The panel, consisting of two Trump-era appointees and one Obama-era appointee, issued the order without dissent in the case known as Nguyen v. Bonta.

The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), which has been challenging this law since 2020, welcomed the decision. Brandon Combs, the FPC’s President, stated that Californians can now apply to purchase multiple firearms within a 30-day period, pending any further legal developments. FPC is a 501(c)4 nonprofit membership organization, exists to create a world of maximal human liberty, defend constitutional rights, advance individual liberty, and restore freedom. 

The law in question, initially introduced in 2019 and expanded in 2022, restricted the purchase of handguns, semi-automatic centerfire rifles, and eventually all firearms and “precursor parts” to one per 30 days from licensed dealers. This made California’s restrictions more comprehensive than similar laws in other states.

U.S. District Judge William Q. Hayes had previously ruled the law unconstitutional, citing a lack of historical precedent for such restrictions. The state appealed this decision, leading to the current legal proceedings.

During recent oral arguments, California’s attorneys defended the law as a measure to prevent bulk purchases that could facilitate illegal firearms trafficking. They also argued that the law doesn’t infringe on the right to “keep” or “bear” arms, but merely regulates commercial acquisition.

However, the judges appeared skeptical of this reasoning. Circuit Judge Danielle J. Forrest drew parallels to hypothetical restrictions on book purchases or protest attendance, suggesting such limitations would be considered absurd.

The case continues to progress through the legal system, with the final outcome yet to be determined. For now, California’s gun buyers face fewer restrictions on their purchases.