United States District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez on Tuesday blocked the sweeping law in a blatant rejection of the state’s overreach. The California Rifle and Pistol Association brought the successful challenge to the restrictions.
The law stemmed from Proposition 63, which was passed eight years ago. It established a draconian string of protocols governing what should be the simple process of purchasing ammunition.
All ammo purchasers must undergo a background check and must also apply and pay for a purchasing permit. Ammunition may only be transferred through a licensed dealer with no ability to purchase online for direct shipment.
Prop 63 also established an official listing of all individuals permitted to acquire ammunition.
The Rhode case along with Duncan v. Bonta were in the Ninth Circuit as the U.S. Supreme Court issued its landmark Bruen decision in 2022. Justices reconfirmed the rights of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms outside of the home for self-defense.
This in turn created an avalanche of anti-gun legislation as a response to the high court upholding Second Amendment freedoms.
It also remanded Rhode and Duncan back to lower courts for further judicial action.
Benitez did not mince words when he enjoined the law and found it to be unconstitutional.
He wrote “the state’s ammunition background check regime turns…constitutional presumptions the wrong way around. It treats all citizens as if they do not enjoy a right to buy ammunition. It forces Americans to entreat and supplicate the state for permission. This is not the language of a right, this is the language of a government license or grant of a privilege.”
Benitez also agreed with the plaintiff’s charge that the California prohibition on purchasing ammunition in other states and transporting it back was unconstitutional.
As part of his ruling, the judge barred state prosecutors from enforcing the ammunition background check provisions or the anti-importation statute.
Lead attorney Sean Brady of Michel & Associates called the ammunition background check system “egregious” and “over the top.” He declared, “Today’s ruling reiterates that California’s restrictions on ammunition purchasing are unconstitutional under yet another ruling in our favor and one that is in line with the Supreme Court opinion in Bruen.”
Rhode v. Bonta took the name of plaintiff and Olympic shooting champion Kim Rhode. She is certainly a great individual to be in the lead position for defending Second Amendment rights.
In her illustrious career, Rhode won three gold medals, one silver and two bronzes. She became the first woman and first summer Olympian to win medals in six consecutive Olympic games.
Rhode, who first medaled in the Atlanta 1996 Summer Olympics as a 17-year-old, is the only athlete to win Olympic medals in all three competitive shooting categories (trap, double trap and skeet).
Obviously, she had great cause to celebrate the ruling by Benitez.
“Like I initially stated to (California Gov.) Gavin Newsom, ‘always happy to teach you about the guns and ammo you don’t trust me to own.’ I’m happy that the courts agreed with me. Many generations of hunters, outdoorsmen and Olympians will be able to train and pass on the shooting heritage for many generations.”
Rhode added, “I will never stop fighting for the Second Amendment and what I believe to be right, and the court’s ruling supports that.”
Certainly, it was a joint effort to bring about this huge court victory in California. The work of multiple lawyers and organizations only proved the necessity of supporting the Second Amendment through those who stand up and fight. It is through their efforts that Americans continue to exercise the right to keep and bear arms.
