In the ruling, Benitez found the “fee-shifting” provision violated federal constitutional rights.
The judge’s ruling preserves constitutionally protected freedom of speech rights, legal experts told The Epoch Times.
Attorney Joshua Dale, one of the lawyers representing South Bay Rod and Gun Club, a San Diego-area gun club that sued over the provision, told The Epoch Times clients had been waiting for the matter to be decided before filing lawsuits against gun regulations.
“That was a big disincentive for folks obviously who want to adjudicate their civil rights,” Dale said.
The law made the state a de facto winner in all litigation, he said. Those who sued the state over gun laws would have had to pay the state’s attorney fees, even if they won in some cases.
Benitez was “very cognizant of the unfairness of the law and the unfairness of the state’s position on the law,” Dale said. “Whether you agree or disagree with any one of a number of civil liberty issues, this sort of restriction on access to the courts shouldn’t ever be promoted on any aspect of society.”
The law also favored one group of people over another, placing “viewpoint-based” restriction on speech, San Diego law professor Ken Vandevelde told The Epoch Times.
“This law inhibits speech because of the fact that it penalized someone for engaging in speech,” Vandevelde said. “Bringing a lawsuit to protect your constitutional rights is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment.”
The fee-shifting statute also undermined federal civil rights laws that award attorneys’ fees to plaintiffs who challenge unconstitutional action and are successful on at least one claim, he said.
The California law was modeled around the Texas “heartbeat act,” SB 8, which prohibits abortions after six weeks into a pregnancy. That law also allows citizens to file lawsuits for $10,000 against doctors, providers, and others who participate in illegal abortions.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta removed himself from defending the lawsuit on Dec. 8 in a court filing, telling the court he wasn’t in a position to defend the fee-shifting provision and that it was constitutionally problematic. Bonta handed the lawsuit over to the governor’s legal team to litigate.
Despite promoting the gun law and signing it, Newsom applauded the judge’s decision to block the legislation.
The fee-shifting provision was a replica of part of the Texas law, according to Newsom. “There is no longer any doubt that Texas’ cruel anti-abortion law should also be struck down,” he said.
Benitez’s ruling only applies to the California law. In his ruling, Benitez didn’t address the constitutionality of the SB 8 law.
He said, “Whether these distinctions are enough to save the Texas fee-shifting provision from judicial scrutiny remains to be seen.”
