When California Gov. Gavin Newsom appeared on the Shawn Ryan Show recently, he discussed his "gun safety" efforts, bragging about gun-grabbing ballot initiatives he proposed and championed like 2016's Proposition 63. Proposition 63 required people to undergo a background check to purchase ammunition (of course, there's a fee for that), required ammunition purchases to be done in person, and prohibited California residents from bringing ammunition in from out of state. That scheme has now been declared unconstitutional by the Ninth Circuit, the latest in a long line of Gavin Newsom's authoritarian schemes to be smacked down by the judiciary.
On the Shawn Ryan Show, he said:
"I did two gun safety laws that I actually put on the ballot... my gun safety legislation overwhelmingly passed in CA. That was my initiative, I got out, I did signatures and put it in front of the voters...and it's been well-received."
He was then asked about the difficulty law-abiding Californians face when attempting to obtain a concealed carry permit in the state, which is an expensive and time-consuming process, and defended it by saying that a majority of Californians don't want people just walking around armed, as if that's a valid reason to infringe upon someone's fundamental rights.
Six-time Olympic medal winner (double trap, skeet shooting) and California resident Kim Rhode was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit challenging the ammunition background check scheme. In 2024, U.S. District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez ruled that it was unconstitutional and issued a permanent injunction. On Thursday, a three-judge panel issued a 2-1 decision concluding that the law is facially unconstitutional, upholding Benitez's decision and endorsing the permanent injunction.
Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta, writing for the majority, said that the background scheme "meaningfully constrains the right to keep operable arms."
California’s ammunition background check regime regulates all ammunition acquisitions by California residents; the regime applies not only to every transaction in California but also to ammunition purchases by California residents outside the state. It requires California residents to pay for and complete an in-person background check before each ammunition acquisition. Though not all the rules comprising California’s ammunition background check regime impose delays on their face, they do not require California to approve checks within a certain timeframe.
Requirements prior to various types of background checks, such as fingerprinting, inherently cause some amount of delay. After approval, moreover, a California resident may be required to purchase ammunition during a specified period of time—e.g., 18 hours—after passing a background check. The regime applies to all types of ammunition, and California residents cannot avoid the background check requirements by taking advantage of internet or out-of-state sales. Rather, out-of-state purchases are subject to additional delays and fees. Given the fees and delays associated with California’s ammunition background check regime, and the wide range of transactions to which it applies, we conclude that, in all applications, the regime meaningfully constrains California residents’ right to keepand bear arms. Thus, it is not a “presumptively lawful regulatory measure[].”
Predictably, Newsom wasn't a fan of the decision, and also completely missed the point, saying:
"Strong gun laws save lives – and today’s decision is a slap in the face to the progress California has made in recent years to keep its communities safer from gun violence. Californians voted to require background checks on ammunition and their voices should matter."
A press release from Newsom's office echoed his sentiments on the Shawn Ryan Show, asserting that Californians want this, so it should be done.
Most major polls show overwhelming bipartisan support for universal background checks and other gun safety measures, with support typically ranging from 85% to 90%. A 2023 Fox News poll found that 87% of American voters back criminal background checks for all gun buyers. In California, voters approved background checks for ammunition purchases in 2016 by a 63% to 36% margin.
But, as Second Amendment Foundation's Kostas Moros said, the version of the law that's in effect now isn't what voters approved of, thanks to California's Democrat supermajority.
"The version the voters enacted in 2016 would have been a one-time background check, and then you get a card that is valid for several years.
The legislature ignored the will of the voters and immediately amended that to the ridiculous system we have in place now, which by the CA DOJ's own admission, wrongfully denies 11% of everyone who tries to use it.
The ratio of wrongful denials to prohibited people being denied was over 400:1, in data the State itself submitted. How does denying the rights of 400 people to catch one prohibited person make sense? Do their voices and rights not matter?
Plus, California is now raising the fee. Instead of $1 every time you purchase ammunition, it will be $5, which adds up fast.
"The will of the voters" is not a defense to an unconstitutional law anyway, but even if it were, California's system is not what voters passed.
Newsom will undoubtedly have Attorney General Rob Bonta appeal the decision. In the post-Bruen era, they'll have an uphill climb.
Just because it's so mind-numbingly stupid, here's the California Department of Justice's explanation of how the two types of Ammunition Eligibility Checks work:
The Standard Ammunition Eligibility Check will cross-reference the ammunition purchaser’s name, date of birth, current address, and driver license or other government identification number with the information maintained in the Automated Firearms System (AFS). If the purchaser’s information does not match an AFS entry, the transaction shall be denied. If the purchaser’s information matches an AFS entry, the Department shall determine if the purchaser falls within a class of persons who are prohibited from owning or possessing ammunition by cross-referencing with the Prohibited Armed Persons File (also known as the Armed and Prohibited Persons System). If the purchaser is prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm, the transaction shall be denied. Determinations for this type of eligibility check can be completed in approximately two minutes. If it is determined that you are eligible, then you can complete the purchase of ammunition shortly after the determination is received by the California Ammunition Vendor. The fee is $5.00.
The Basic Ammunition Eligibility Check requires the Department to conduct a comprehensive review of its records to determine the person’s eligibility to own or possess ammunition. This eligibility check is similar to a firearms eligibility check and may take days to determine eligibility. For this type of eligibility check, the California Ammunition Vendor will have to provide you with an Ammunition Transaction Number so that you can monitor the status of the eligibility check through the Department’s California Firearms Application Reporting System (CFARS). Once CFARS indicates your eligibility check has been approved, you can go back to the California Ammunition Vendor that submitted your eligibility check and complete your ammunition purchase. The approval expires 30 days from the day it was issued, so you must return to the California Ammunition Vendor within 30 days of the approval to complete your ammunition purchase. The fee is $19.00.
Here's a hint for Newsom and Bonta: If it takes that many words and a not-insignificant payment to the state to exercise a fundamental right, it just might be unconstitutional.
Editor’s Note: The radical left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join RedState and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member