A federal judge has rendered a verdict deeming California’s mandate for ammunition purchasers to undergo background checks as unconstitutional, marking a significant development in the ongoing debate over gun control measures.
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, sitting in San Diego, delivered the ruling on Tuesday, asserting that the law in question lacks historical precedent and encroaches upon the Second Amendment rights of individuals.
In his written decision, Benitez, appointed by President George W. Bush, criticized the background check requirement, characterizing it as an unprecedented burden on citizens seeking to exercise their right to purchase ammunition.
The judge also expressed concerns over the rejection rate of law-abiding gun owners following background checks, citing instances where individuals were denied ammunition purchases due to administrative errors or lack of accurate record-keeping by the state.
Benitez’s ruling includes a permanent injunction halting the enforcement of the law while the state pursues an appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
California’s Attorney General, Rob Bonta, a Democrat, defended the ammunition background check law as a vital public safety measure, emphasizing its role in preventing gun-related violence.
However, Governor Gavin Newsom, also a Democrat, condemned the judge’s decision, accusing him of prioritizing personal interests and alignment with the gun lobby over upholding constitutional principles and public safety.
The ammunition background check law, initially approved by California voters in 2016 and subsequently amended by the legislature in 2019, has faced legal challenges from prominent figures such as Olympic gold medalist Kim Rhode and the California Rifle & Pistol Association.
Chuck Michel, president and general counsel of the association, hailed the ruling as a significant victory, arguing that the law had unjustly hindered eligible individuals from accessing ammunition.
Benitez’s decision rejected California’s argument that historical regulations dating back to 1789 justified contemporary ammunition background checks, asserting that past discriminatory practices could not justify present-day restrictions on individuals protected by constitutional rights.
The judge’s ruling drew upon the U.S. Supreme Court’s precedent-setting decision in 2022, which affirmed the expansion of gun rights nationwide and emphasized the importance of assessing firearm regulations in alignment with historical traditions of regulation.