A challenge to California's controversial ammunition restrictions is now bolstered by more than half the country, as well as the federal government.
Rhode vs. Bonta, which is currently awaiting a rare en banc rehearing by the full U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, was recently backed by a coalition that included the attorneys general of 25 states and the Arizona legislature, as well as the U.S. Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.
Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon announced this week that the Justice Department has filed an amicus brief arguing that purchasing ammunition plainly falls under the Second Amendment.
"CA’s in-person background-check regime – required before every ammunition purchase – restricts the ability of Californians to keep & bear arms," noted Dhillon on social media.
She was influential in establishing the new Second Amendment Section inside the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, and has gone after both the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Los Angeles Sheriff in recent weeks over gun rights issues.
The DOJ's 36-page amicus brief contends, among other things, that acquiring ammunition is conduct covered by the Second Amendment’s plain text, California’s background-check regime for ammunition purchases imposes a “meaningful constraint” on the right to bear arms, that the restriction is inconsistent with this Nation’s historical tradition, and that it is just outright unconstitutional.
"The significance of Justice Department interest in the California case cannot be overstated,” Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Chairman Alan Gottlieb told Guns.com. The CCRKBA has filed its own brief in Rhode, along with several other pro-gun groups. "This would never have happened under the previous administration, where the attorney general was clearly hostile to the Second Amendment. While some have lately criticized the DOJ and Attorney General Pam Bondi, we understand that righting all the wrongs heaped upon the Second Amendment over the past four or five decades cannot happen overnight."
Going past the federal government, Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost and Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador are leading a coalition of 26 states in opposing California’s ammo control scheme by filing their own 31-page brief in Rhode.
"California has spun a web of burdensome laws designed to stop residents from buying ammunition," Yost said. "The right to bear arms includes the right to buy ammunition – and we’re asking the court to once again declare these laws unconstitutional."
Joining Yost and Labrador in signing the amicus brief are the attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
The primary plaintiff in the case, famed Olympic shooting sports Gold Medalist Kim Rhode, brought the challenge in 2018 over the tenets of California Proposition 63 and the follow-on state Senate Bill 1235, which placed several controls on the sale and transfer of ammunition.
These restrictions included a ban on purchasing ammunition online for home delivery, making it illegal to bring in bullets purchased legally while traveling out of state, and mandating a background check on every over-the-counter ammo sale, the latter process complete with onerous fees, backlogs, errors, and red tape.
In early 2024, a federal judge ordered a full injunction against the state, barring it from enforcing the law.
The en banc panel, set to rehear the case in March, will be led by Chief Judge Mary Murguia, a Clinton appointment to the federal bench that was elevated to the court of appeals by President Obama. Of the Ninth Circuit's current judges, 16 were appointed by Democratic presidents and 13 by Republicans.
