Senior US District Judge Roger T. Benitez recently declared California’s assault weapon ban unconstitutional, claiming it infringes the right to bear arms as outlined in the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.
The prohibitive California law stipulates a felony for those who manufacture, distribute, import, or keep assault weapons such as AR-15s for sale or lend them. Judge Benitez deemed this policy extreme, arguing that it penalizes law-abiding citizens and denies them the choice of using AR-15s for self-defense.
Basing his opinion on the 2022 Supreme Court case New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the judge stated that it’s their duty to interpret the Constitution according to its text and original understanding, not using public policy considerations.
In the Bruen case, a law prohibiting the open carry of firearms was invalidated by the Supreme Court. The court concluded legislation restricting gun rights must demonstrate that it aligns with the nation’s historical tradition, particularly when the plain language of the Second Amendment applies directly to an individual’s actions.
Following a detailed historical debate, the Judge opined California failed to effectively prove how its regulation complied with established historical tradition. He termed it as “patently incorrect” to assert that governments possess significant police power in deciding which firearms should be prohibited. He also mentioned that states began introducing concealed-carry handgun laws only after 1868, long after the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791.
Although Judge Benitez prohibited California from implementing its assault weapon ban, he postponed the injunction by ten days, allowing an opportunity to appeal the decision. It is anticipated that the case will be escalated to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Interestingly, there have been several other court cases challenging state gun laws following the Bruen case. For instance, in July, an Oregon judge declared that Oregon Ballot Measure 114—which restricts large-capacity magazines and mandates permits for purchasing a gun—is constitutional. Moreover, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit pronounced that the Second Amendment safeguards the rights of non-violent offenders against federal firearm prohibitions.