Just days after a federal judge struck down a California law banning so-called “high-capacity magazines” capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a laundry list of new gun control laws, including a tax on weapons and ammunition.
Some of the new laws were the subjects of lawsuits before they reached Mr. Newsom’s desk.
According to a press release on Mr. Newsom’s website, the two dozen new laws would strengthen public carry regulations; require microstamping on handgun cartridges to trace guns used in crimes; set laws to keep guns out of the hands of potentially dangerous people; update the definition of a firearm to include unserialized “ghost gun” parts; and bolster the process for taking guns from prohibited persons.
In a statement released after he signed the new laws on Sept. 26, Mr. Newsom promised to keep pushing for ever more stringent laws.
“While radical judges continue to strip away our ability to keep people safe, California will keep fighting—because gun safety laws work,” Mr. Newsom wrote.
Chuck Michel, an attorney and president of the California Rifle and Pistol Association, says other states would do well to watch California.
Speaking to the Gun Rights Policy Conference in Phoenix, Arizona, on Sept. 23, Mr. Michel said that California is a gun law laboratory.
“It’s not just a California problem,” Mr. Michel said.
Based on Judge Benitez’s ruling in the magazine case, the state may have difficulty defending those laws under the standard set by the U.S. Supreme Court in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.
In that case, the court ruled that a law must be in line with the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment. In a nutshell, if the law is not found in the text of the Second Amendment and has no precedence, it likely will be found unconstitutional.
“One government solution to a few mad men with guns is a law that makes into criminals responsible, law-abiding people wanting larger magazines simply to protect themselves. That kind of a solution is an infringement on the Constitutional right of citizens to keep and bear arms,” Judge Benitez wrote in his decision.
Mr. Benitez granted the state a 10-day stay to file an appeal, which it has done.
At the press conference, Mr. Newsom proudly confirmed that California is a bellwether for gun control nationwide. He said, “California has led the modern gun rights movement since 1967.”
He also pointed out that the first so-called “assault weapons” ban on certain semi-automatic firearms was signed by then-Gov. Ronald Reagan.
“Ronald Reagan himself advocated for the assault weapons ban. We saw a significant decline in the gun death rate in the state of California between the years when this state asserted its leadership and moral authority,” Mr. Newsom said.
He also had harsh language for the U.S. Supreme Court and gun rights advocates.
According to Mr. Newsom, it will take a coordinated national effort to push through his gun safety agenda.
“They’re coming after these laws, and they’re winning in the federal courts. It’s going to take a national construct, a national frame,” he said.
“Bruen will require a different approach to gun safety.”
Mr. Michel said gun-control organizations have already started that approach.
He said before Bruen, the courts could consider the intended results of a law.
If they determined the law’s intended impact outweighed its infringement on the Second Amendment, they could rule it constitutional.
In Bruen, the court ruled that if a law did not comply with the text and history of the Second Amendment, it was not constitutional.
For example, in the magazine ban case, Judge Benitez found that nothing in the Second Amendment allowed the state to keep such items as magazines that hold more than 10 rounds away from law-abiding citizens.
Narrowly Define Terms
Mr. Michel said the gun-control strategy now will be to pick apart the law and narrowly define terms. The object is to create enough questions and confusion that judges will uphold the law regardless of Bruen.For example, Bruen references guns in “common use” for lawful purposes. These include hunting, marksmanship, and other forms of recreation.
Mr. Michel said some gun control lawyers have defined “use” as pulling the trigger.
“So, unless you actually shoot somebody, you never actually used your gun for self-defense. So, it’s not a common use. This is the kind of lawyer double-speak that the states are pushing, and some courts are buying it,” Mr. Michel said.
According to Mr. Newsom, it’s the federal courts that are engaging in double-speak. He called the Bruen decision “devastating” and a “perversion.”
He said the ruling shows how much influence gun rights activists can exercise over the Court.
“Don’t get me started on how corrupt the Supreme Court of the United States is,” Mr. Newsom said.
Mr. Michel said California’s response to the Bruen decision is the same as New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. All are states that tightened their gun laws after Bruen.
New York, where the case originated, changed the process for issuing concealed carry permits to comply with Bruen. But, it also expanded the list of “sensitive places” where firearm possession would be illegal.
California Senate Bill 2, which Mr. Newsom signed that day, mirrors that strategy.
Mr. Michel said it is no coincidence that California is pushing similar policies. He said national gun-control organizations are investing in the state’s gun-control movement to gather information for campaigns elsewhere.
According to Mr. Michel, Everytown for Gun Safety, founded by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, is active in California.
“At one point, Bloomberg had pledged $800 million to push gun control efforts. That was like 10 years ago. Who knows what he’s spent now on the teams of lawyers that he had working with State Attorney General’s Offices to pass these kinds of laws?” Mr. Michel said.
The study concludes that a tiny portion of the country accounted for well over half of all the murders committed by any means.
“The worst 5 percent of counties contain 47 percent of the population and account for 73 percent of murders. But even within those counties, murders are very heavily concentrated in small areas,” the study reads.
According to the study, some regions of Los Angeles County show much higher murder rates than the rest of the state.
According to the study, in 2020, Los Angeles County reported 691 murders, second only to Cook County, Illinois.
At the Sept. 26 press conference, Mr. Newsom repeated his contention that gun deaths in California have decreased and that his state’s laws should be spread nationwide.
“It’s great what we’re doing, but it may not be enough. It may not be enough if the federal courts are throwing [the laws] out in a post-Bruen framework,” he said.
