SAN DIEGO – In a significant legal development, a federal judge in San Diego has issued a permanent injunction, effectively halting California’s enforcement of a law mandating background checks for ammunition purchases.
The case, initiated in 2018, targeted interconnected state statutes. Proposition 63, endorsed by voters in 2016, initially required gun owners to undergo a $50 background check to obtain a 4-year permit for ammunition purchases. However, prior to the proposition’s passage, the Legislature amended it prospectively, compelling gun owners to undergo background checks for each ammunition purchase and prohibiting them from buying ammunition from out-of-state vendors.
U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, appointed by President George W. Bush, rendered the decision, asserting that the ammunition background check laws lacked historical precedent and encroached upon citizens’ Second Amendment rights. Judge Benitez’s order underscored the simplicity and constitutionality of the voter-approved permit system proposed in Proposition 63.
In his characteristically vivid prose, Judge Benitez criticized the Legislature’s scheme as an undue financial and logistical burden imposed on gun owners, likening it to requiring a credit check for every gas refill or electric car recharge, thereby jeopardizing gun owners’ safety.
Highlighting the practical implications, Judge Benitez illustrated a scenario where a citizen’s inability to purchase ammunition due to erroneous background check results infringed upon their right to self-defense.
Statistics revealed the extent of the law’s impact, with over 538,000 background checks conducted in the first half of 2022, resulting in over 58,000 rejections, primarily due to administrative discrepancies. Notably, between July 2019 and January 2020, 770 individuals were prevented from purchasing ammunition, leading to subsequent arrests and convictions.
Drawing parallels with voting rights legislation, Judge Benitez invoked legal precedent to argue that the ammunition background check law constituted an unconstitutional burden on Second Amendment rights, akin to restrictions on voting rights.
The legal battle was supported by the California Rifle & Pistol Association, represented by attorney Chuck Michel, who lauded the ruling as a victory for gun owners’ rights while criticizing the state’s approach to gun control.
Responding to the ruling, current State Attorney General Rob Bonta expressed intent to challenge the decision, emphasizing the importance of background checks in safeguarding lives.
The ruling represents a significant victory for proponents of Second Amendment rights and sets the stage for continued legal debate over gun control measures in California.