Politics
9th Circuit upholds California ban on large-capacity ammunition magazines
California has the authority to ban large-capacity ammunition magazines, a federal appellate court ruled Thursday, reversing a previous decision that found the state law unconstitutional under the strict, history-minded limits on gun control measures recently established by the Supreme Court.
Writing for the 11-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Circuit Judge Susan P. Graber found that the state’s ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds fell in line with other historical weapons restrictions in that it “restricts an especially dangerous feature of semiautomatic firearms — the ability to use a large-capacity magazine — while allowing all other uses of those firearms.”
“So far as California’s law is concerned, persons may own as many bullets, magazines, and firearms as they desire; may fire as many rounds as they like; and may carry their bullets, magazines, and firearms wherever doing so is permissible. The only effect of California’s law on armed self-defense is the limitation that a person may fire no more than ten rounds without pausing to reload, something rarely done in self-defense,” Graber wrote.
While the law was not a “precise match” to historical weapons restrictions, “it does not need to be,” Graber wrote, citing previous case law. The state’s aim, to “protect innocent persons from infrequent but devastating events,” was “relevantly similar” to the justifications of some historic laws, she wrote, and that was enough to justify it under the modern Supreme Court standard.
The Supreme Court established in 2022 that modern firearms regulations usually must align with some historic law to be legitimate.
The panel’s decision reverses an opposing ruling by a lower court, and sends the case back down to that court for reconsideration.
The ruling was a major win for California and a coalition of nearly 20 liberal states that joined in the fight to uphold the ban, a measure they described as critical in the fight against mass shootings and other gun violence.
“California’s ban on large-capacity magazines has been a key component in our efforts to fight gun violence and prevent senseless injuries and deaths and the devastation of communities and families that are left behind in the wake of mass shootings,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said in a statement. “This commonsense restriction on how many rounds a gunman can fire before they must pause to reload has been identified as a critical intervention to limit a lone shooter’s capacity to turn shootings into mass casualty attacks.”
Bonta said the ruling would save lives and was an “important win.”
California gun owners and advocacy groups challenged the ban, and more than two dozen conservative states argued alongside them that the restrictions amounted to an unlawful infringement on the self-defense rights of average, law-abiding Californians.
“This incorrect ruling is not surprising considering the inclination of many 9th Circuit judges to improperly limit the 2nd Amendment’s protections,” said Chuck Michel, an attorney for the plaintiffs.
Michel said he intended to ask the Supreme Court to review — and vacate — the 9th Circuit’s decision.
“It is high time for the Supreme Court to [rein] in lower courts that are not following the Supreme Court’s mandates,” he said, “and this case presents an opportunity for the High Court to do that emphatically.”
The case, which has been ongoing for years, is one of many in California and around the country that have been re-litigated with an eye toward sometimes centuries-old weapons laws since the Supreme Court’s ruling requiring such analysis in 2022, in a case known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. vs. Bruen.
There, the high court rejected a long-standing pillar of 2nd Amendment law and said most restrictions on firearms are legitimate only if they are deeply rooted in American history, or sufficiently similar to some historic rule.
The ruling prompted states like California to delve through history to find historic laws — including against antiquated weapons such as “trap guns” — that could be construed as establishing early precedent for current laws against modern weapons such as assault rifles.
In September 2023, District Judge Roger Benitez of San Diego ruled that California’s ban on large-capacity magazines was unconstitutional under the new Bruen standard. In October 2023, he ruled the state’s ban on assault rifles was similarly unconstitutional.
The 9th Circuit stayed both decisions, as it took them up for review. Many in the state were awaiting Thursday’s decision in the magazines case — which could help to clear a logjam in other gun litigation, in California and across the American West, where the 9th Circuit retains jurisdiction.
The decision divided Graber, an appointee of President Clinton, and the panel’s liberal judges from its conservative judges. Three panel judges appointed by President Trump — Ryan D. Nelson, Patrick J. Bumatay and Lawrence VanDyke — wrote dissents.
Bumatay wrote that California has a justifiable interest in reducing gun violence, but that its long list of gun control measures “continually whittle away the Second Amendment guarantee,” and in clear violation of the Bruen decision.
“Nothing in the historical understanding of the Second Amendment warrants California’s magazine ban. Even with some latitude in searching for historical analogues, none exist,” he wrote.
In his own dissent, Nelson wrote that he agreed with Bumatay that the panel majority’s decision upholding California’s law as constitutional “flouts” the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bruen.
President Trump has suggested attacks against Tesla are a coordinated effort to intimidate the billionaire Elon Musk, but an internal intelligence assessment did not support that claim and warned against conflating legal protests against Mr. Musk with vandalism to his property.
The attacks on Tesla vehicles and facilities “appear to have been conducted by lone offenders, and all known incidents occurred at night, making identification and arrest of the actors difficult,” officials with the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security wrote in an intelligence bulletin dated March 21 and obtained by The New York Times.
The initial assessment, shared with law enforcement agencies across the country and subject to change as investigations proceed, was based on an analysis of vandalism investigations in nine states over the past two months. It concluded that the attacks, which included firing gunshots, spraying graffiti, smashing windows and setting vehicles on fire, were “rudimentary” and not intended to injure people.
The people taking these actions “may perceive these attacks as victimless property crimes,” but their “tactics can cause accidental or intentional bodily harm” to bystanders and first responders, the officials wrote in the report.
While law enforcement agencies should aggressively pursue people committing those acts, they should not investigate “constitutionally protected activity” directed at Mr. Musk, who has overseen a far-reaching effort to reduce the size and function of the federal government, they added.
Last week, Attorney General Pam Bondi described the Tesla attacks as “domestic terrorism.” The director of the F.B.I., Kash Patel, reiterated that assessment on Monday, saying it was investigating what he described as an increase in violent activity.
The bulletin did not explicitly identify the vandalism as “domestic violent extremism,” the term the government uses to describe domestic terrorism, although it cited political motives for the attacks. Its only mention of domestic violent extremism was an assessment of the difficulty in determining extremists’ “intent to commit violence.”
Mr. Trump suggested last week the vandalism was paid for “by people very highly political on the left,” without providing evidence.
A few days later, Ms. Bondi said she would prosecute “those operating behind the scenes to coordinate and fund these crimes,” echoing Mr. Trump’s claim.
A spokesman for Ms. Bondi said in a text message that the report “could not possibly include all the current information” given that the investigation was continuing, adding that leaks to the news media could “jeopardize serious terrorism investigations.”
Ms. Bondi has often praised and defended Mr. Musk, whom she has described as one of her close friends. On Sunday, Ms. Bondi suggested she might investigate Representative Jasmine Crockett, a Texas Democrat, for telling attendees at an online anti-Musk rally that the world’s richest man needed to be “taken down” — even though Ms. Crockett said she was calling for political action, not violence.
“She is an elected public official, so she needs to tread very carefully because nothing will happen to Elon Musk, and we’re going to fight to protect all of the Tesla owners throughout this country,” Ms. Bondi said of Ms. Crockett during an appearance on Fox.
Mr. Patel echoed Mr. Trump and his allies in denouncing the vandalism.
“This is domestic terrorism,” he wrote on X. “Those responsible will be pursued, caught, and brought to justice.”
The attacks on Tesla facilities have intensified as opposition to Mr. Musk has grown.
Police arrested a 26-year-old woman a week ago for spraypainting anti-Musk messages on the front windows of a Tesla facility in Buffalo Grove, Ill. That same day, vandals broke windows and defaced a dealership in the San Diego area with swastikas and slogans.
Later in the week, unknown attackers fired more than a dozen shots at a Tesla dealership in Tigard, Ore., damaging some of the vehicles and store windows, followed by the firebombing of several Cybertrucks at a Tesla facility in Kansas City.
On Monday, several unexploded incendiary devices were found at a Tesla dealership in Austin that has been the site of anti-Musk protests. They were removed without incident.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is facing calls for his replacement after his controversial decision to help advance President Donald Trump’s recent stopgap spending bill to avoid a government shutdown, but not all Democrats are prepared to push him out just yet, giving him some time to prove himself.
For some in the party, Schumer is ruling on borrowed time.
“Something’s [got to] give,” former Democrat pollster Adam Carlson told Fox News Digital. “And while I would expect him to want to hold onto his leadership, I suspect the outright calls and whispers from his colleagues for him to be replaced as minority leader are real.”
“It’s a matter of when, not if,” he claimed.
BATTLE OF THE CHAMBERS: HOUSE AND SENATE TENSIONS BOIL OVER AS TRUMP BUDGET HANGS IN LIMBO
Chuck Schumer’s future as Democrat leader in the Senate is anything but certain after a crucial vote that led to backlash. (Reuters)
The influence he has lost among his own caucus is evident “by dozens of Senate Dems, including those in Trump-won states, coming out against the CR (continuing resolution) even after Schumer came out in favor of it,” Carlson said.
After Schumer’s vote this month, and the verbal shellacking and protests that followed, he told NBC News’ “Meet the Press” on Sunday, “Look, I’m not stepping down.”
Following his vote, protests emerged outside his home and offices in Washington and New York, and he began to face calls for his ousting as leader and threats of primary challenges down the road.
“You know, sometimes when you’re a leader, you have to do things to avoid a real danger that might come down the curve,” Schumer further told “Meet the Press.”
The Democrat also pushed back on suggestions that his situation has parallels with that of former President Joe Biden, who was pressured to end his presidential campaign with just months until the election last year.
BIDEN ADMIN’S ‘VAST CENSORSHIP ENTERPRISE’ WITH HELP OF NGOS SLATED FOR KEY HEARING, LAWMAKER SAYS
But for the Democrat strategists looking at his circumstances, the similarities are clear.
Co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) Adam Green told Fox News Digital, “I don’t think his recent caving was a June debate moment for Chuck Schumer, but it was a fall-off-the-bike moment,” making explicit comparisons to Biden’s biking accident and his disastrous presidential debate performance that preceded his campaign suspension.
“And if he continues to stumble … instead of meeting this moment, there will be continued questions about his future leadership,” he said.
President Joe Biden falls to the ground during a bike ride in Rehoboth Beach, Del., on June 18, 2022. (Reuters/Elizabeth Frantz)
“I think it’s an uphill fight for him,” Green explained.
The PCCC leader compared Schumer to Biden once more, noting that the former president also had a prime and “eventually that prime was over.”
Carlson said “Schumer was an effective majority leader” for many years, “but being an opposition leader is an entirely different skill set” and could be one that the Democrat leader doesn’t have.
Some Democrat strategists speculated about potential replacements for the Senate minority leader if it comes to that, proposing Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., specifically.
“Chris Murphy has been turning a lot of heads,” Green said.
CONGRESS EXPANDED THE EXECUTIVE – ONLY FOR TRUMP TO QUASH MUCH OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE
Sen. Chris Murphy has emerged as one to watch. (Getty Images)
Representatives for Murphy, Schatz and Klobuchar did not provide comment in time for publication.
Other Democrat strategists don’t think Schumer should be replaced and are confident he won’t be.
Schumer “will survive this,” Democrat strategist Max Burns told Fox News Digital. He credited Trump’s “habit of flooding the zone” with Schumer’s ability to hang on.
Jim Kessler, former senior aide to Schumer and executive vice president for policy at Third Way, told Fox News Digital he expects him “to remain as the Democratic leader in the Senate.”
“Yes, there is a vocal group of House Democrats and activists calling for him to step aside as leader,” he said. But, “There is almost no one in the Senate doing so and most Democrats in Washington are simply keeping their heads down.”
“I talked to one House Democrat who said he was livid for 24 hours and then thankful after he thought about it for a few days,” Kessler said.
GOP SENATOR SAYS HE’S WORKING WITH TRUMP ON BILL TO ABOLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
Schumer said he won’t step down. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Jim Manley, former senior communications advisor and spokesperson for former Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and the Senate Democratic Caucus, agreed that Schumer does not need to step down.
“There is plenty of blame to go around” that isn’t confined to Schumer, Manley said.
Another Democrat strategist, who opted to remain anonymous, said “we’re in this position where no one has stepped up to be sort of the primary protagonist to Trump as the antagonist,” pointing to former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., as someone who skillfully played this role in his first administration.
The strategist further hammered Democrats for being too quick to dispose of leaders and party members who make mistakes or disagree, labeling the calls for Schumer to step down “premature.”
Schumer’s office did not provide comment to Fox News Digital in time for publication.
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s lawyers urged the Supreme Court on Monday to block a judge’s order requiring the government to “immediately” rehire 16,000 federal employees.
In an emergency appeal, they argued that U.S. District Judge William Alsup in San Francisco had no legal authority to second-guess the administration’s personnel decisions.
The appeal is the first asking the high court to weigh in on the administration’s aggressive plan to shrink the federal workforce.
Acting Solicitor Gen. Sarah Harris said the judge’s “extraordinary reinstatement order violates the separation of powers, arrogating to a single district court the Executive Branch’s powers of personnel management on the flimsiest of grounds and the hastiest of timelines. That is no way to run a government.”
She said the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals had yet to rule on the administration’s appeal of the judge’s order, and asked the high court to put the judge’s order on hold, at least temporarily.
While federal employees have legal rights as civil servants, those rights have proved to be largely ineffective in fighting the large-scale layoffs.
Unions representing tens of thousands of federal employees sued in late January, but their suits were tossed out on the grounds that the civil service law requires employees to lodge their complaints with an administrative agency inside the government.
The Supreme Court has said this is the exclusive route for such claims.
As a fallback option, Alsup, an appointee of President Clinton, cited claims from people who rely on the National Park Service or on the Veteran Affairs, Defense, Energy, Agriculture, Interior and Treasury departments.
Speaking in his courtroom, he ordered those agencies to “offer reinstatement to any and all probationary employees terminated on or about February 13th and 14th 2025.”
Harris did not describe what the administration has done to comply with the order.
She said the Supreme Court “should not allow a single district court to … seize control over reviewing federal personnel decisions.”
The justices are likely to ask for a response from the lawyers who filed suit in San Francisco.
Oklahoma 96, Iowa 62: OUtmuscled
Kansas trooper rescues kidnapped 6-year-old girl, takes 2 men into custody during traffic stop
Themes in Kentucky's two wins against Tennessee
Louisiana Small Business Development Center’s director shares about impact on local economy
No need to call, even if your Maine E-ZPass says you need to
-
Midwest1 week agoOhio college 'illegally forcing students' to share bathrooms with opposite sex: watchdog
-
News1 week agoFor Canadians Visiting Myrtle Beach, Trump Policies Make the Vibe Chillier
-
News6 days agoTrump Administration Ends Tracking of Kidnapped Ukrainian Children in Russia
-
News6 days agoVance to Lead G.O.P. Fund-Raising, an Apparent First for a Vice President
-
News1 week agoArlington National Cemetery stops highlighting some historical figures on its website
-
News1 week agoBlack Lives Matter Plaza Is Gone. Its Erasure Feels Symbolic.
-
Movie Reviews1 week agoPerusu Movie Review: Mourning wood provides comedy that won’t go down in history
-
Politics1 week agoHouse Democrats to hold 'Day of Action' to push back against GOP-backed spending bill