UPDATE: CRPA’s Lawsuit to Challenge Ammunition Restrictions
At request of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, attorneys have filed a supplemental brief in CRPA’s challenge to California’s one-of-a-kind in the nation ammunition scheme. CRPA’s attorneys were successful in procuring a preliminary injunction against that scheme from the trial court last year. The Ninth Circuit, however, froze enforcement of that injunction until it could weigh in, leaving the scheme in place in the meantime.
The case, known as Rhode v. Becerra, has been fully briefed and argued, but the Ninth Circuit panel of judges considering the case are apparently considering every angle of this case with great scrutiny before ruling. This is the second round of supplemental briefing requested by the panel. The first requested an explanation of whether California’s scheme falls outside of Second Amendment protections. Apparently having answered that to the Court’s satisfaction, it has now asked CRPA for an explanation of why California’s “Basic Check” background check option is unconstitutional standing alone. This was in response to the State’s argument that all the problems with California’s main background check (the “Standard Check”) for which the trial court granted a preliminary injunction were irrelevant because people could just use the Basic Check option. CRPA’s attorneys have provided that explanation in their recently filed brief . Essentially, the brief argues, charging $19 and requiring multiple trips to the store every single time one wishes simply to acquire ammunition, which may only cost a few dollars, cannot meet constitutional scrutiny; especially when there are less restrictive ways to achieve the same result.
Unless the panel requests another round of oral argument, we should have a decision in the coming months. So stay tuned for further developments in this important Second Amendment lawsuit.
You can support litigation just like this that makes a real difference to the average gun owner.