Next Court Action in Line for AWs and Magazines
As our members know, Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL) spent nearly four years bringing the Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). The court action was based on her unilateral action to redefine so-called assault weapons. The National Rifle Association assisted financially and legally, and GOAL spent tens of thousands of dollars only to have the court refuse to hear the case.
Lately, many Massachusetts gun owners have asked why we are not trying again. Currently it would be a waste of resources to begin again from scratch. That is because there is a similar case already in progress out of California that we are supporting.
The case, Duncan v. Becerra, began back in 2017 when the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA) filed action in federal court challenging the state’s magazine ban. In August of 2020 a three judge panel of the Ninth District Federal court upheld a District Court ruling:
“California’s almost- blanket ban on LCMs goes too far in substantially burdening the people’s right to self-defense. We affirm the district court’s summary judgment, and hold that California Penal Code section 32310’s ban on LCMs runs afoul of the Second Amendment.”
Gun owners all over the country were celebrating the decision as a final victory over such bans. They were not happy when we had to inform them that it was not the final say. Even if it were, it would not have affected the law in Massachusetts. A federal circuit court decision only affects the states within its district. But the case moves on.
As expected, the California authorities appealed the decision and requested a review before the full court of the ninth circuit, this is known as “en banc”. That is where the case is now. The court has several options that are explained further in this CRPA article: Duncan en banc- What Happens Next? | CRPA
Our hope, here in Massachusetts, is that the case gets to SCOTUS somehow. An affirmative decision from the high court is the only way the Commonwealth’s magazine laws will be torn up. It will probably not affect the actual the AG’s AW ban, but it will be a start. The biggest challenge will be to find out if SCOTUS will even hear a Second Amendment case. Once we know that, then we can decide our next step.
Thank you to all our members and supporters as we continue the struggle to restore freedom in the Commonwealth.
Please consider making a donation to GOAL to help us continue our efforts!
GOAL - Donate
As our members know, Gun Owners’ Action League (GOAL) spent nearly four years bringing the Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). The court action was based on her unilateral action to redefine so-called assault weapons. The National Rifle Association assisted financially and legally, and GOAL spent tens of thousands of dollars only to have the court refuse to hear the case.
Lately, many Massachusetts gun owners have asked why we are not trying again. Currently it would be a waste of resources to begin again from scratch. That is because there is a similar case already in progress out of California that we are supporting.
The case, Duncan v. Becerra, began back in 2017 when the California Rifle and Pistol Association (CRPA) filed action in federal court challenging the state’s magazine ban. In August of 2020 a three judge panel of the Ninth District Federal court upheld a District Court ruling:
“California’s almost- blanket ban on LCMs goes too far in substantially burdening the people’s right to self-defense. We affirm the district court’s summary judgment, and hold that California Penal Code section 32310’s ban on LCMs runs afoul of the Second Amendment.”
Gun owners all over the country were celebrating the decision as a final victory over such bans. They were not happy when we had to inform them that it was not the final say. Even if it were, it would not have affected the law in Massachusetts. A federal circuit court decision only affects the states within its district. But the case moves on.
As expected, the California authorities appealed the decision and requested a review before the full court of the ninth circuit, this is known as “en banc”. That is where the case is now. The court has several options that are explained further in this CRPA article: Duncan en banc- What Happens Next? | CRPA
Our hope, here in Massachusetts, is that the case gets to SCOTUS somehow. An affirmative decision from the high court is the only way the Commonwealth’s magazine laws will be torn up. It will probably not affect the actual the AG’s AW ban, but it will be a start. The biggest challenge will be to find out if SCOTUS will even hear a Second Amendment case. Once we know that, then we can decide our next step.
Thank you to all our members and supporters as we continue the struggle to restore freedom in the Commonwealth.
Please consider making a donation to GOAL to help us continue our efforts!
GOAL - Donate