We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.
California’s attempt to ban young adults under the age of 21 from buying semi-automatic firearms was just been blocked by the 9th Circuit in San Francisco, which is a huge victory for 2nd amendment rights.
Via the Daily Mail:
A U.S. appeals court ruled Wednesday that California’s ban on the sale of semi-automatic weapons to adults under 21 is unconstitutional.
In a 2-1 ruling, a panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the law violates the Second Amendment right to bear arms, and that a San Diego judge should have blocked what it called ‘an almost total ban on semi-automatic centerfire rifles for young adults.’
‘America would not exist without the heroism of the young adults who fought and died in our revolutionary army,’ Judge Ryan Nelson wrote, ‘Today we reaffirm that our Constitution still protects the right that enabled their sacrifice – the right of young adults to keep and bear arms.’
The Firearms Policy Coalition, which brought the case, said the ruling makes it optimistic age-based gun bans will be overturned in other courts.
The court didn’t grant everything the FPC wanted. They did side with the state on their new requirement that someone under 21 must have a hunting license to purchase rifles and shotguns:
They also sought an injunction blocking the state from requiring a hunting license for adults under 21 – who are not in the military or law enforcement – to purchase rifles or shotguns.
The 9th Circuit ruled the hunting license requirement was reasonable for increasing public safety through ‘sensible firearm control.’
Handgun sales to those under 21 were already prohibited when the hunting license requirement was passed in 2018 after some of the nation’s worst mass shootings were committed by young adults using rifles, including the Valentine’s Day slayings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
Though the 9th Circuit ruled the hunting license requirement reasonable, it said an outright ban on semi-automatic rifles for those under 21 went too far.
‘It’s one thing to say that young adults must take a course and purchase a hunting license before obtaining certain firearms,’ Nelson wrote. ‘But to say that they must become police officers or join the military? It is a blanket ban for everyone except police officers and service members.’
As you might be wondering, the two judges who made this ruling were Trump appointees:
Nelson and Judge Kenneth Lee, who ruled in the majority, were part of Republican President Donald Trump’s wave of conservative-approved nominees that reshaped the famously liberal court.
The judge who dissented was a Bill Clinton appointee.
I think it’s dumb to require a hunting license to buy a shotgun when you only intend to use it for self defense. But regardless, I am glad that these two Trump judges refused to let California leave this segment of its population defenseless. I fully expect the Supreme Court to allow this ruling to stand, assuming the ruling isn’t successfully appealed back to the 9th Circuit en banc.