Federal Court Strikes Down California’s Ammo Background Check Law
Key Takeaways
“California’s ammunition background check regime infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.”
Article Overview
Quick insights and key information
4 min read
Estimated completion
financial news
Article classification
July 27, 2025
05:31 PM
Forbes
Original publisher
The analysis demonstrates What's particularly noteworthy is PolicyFederal Court Strikes Down California’s Ammo Background Check LawByNick Sibilla, Senior Contributor
However, Forbes contributors publish independent expert analyses and insights (something worth watching)
Nevertheless, I cover criminal justice, entrepreneurship, and offbeat lawsuits
Conversely, AuthorJul 27, 2025, 05:31pm EDTIn a major victory for the Second Amendment, on Thursday, the Ninth Circuit U
In contrast, Court of Appeals struck down a first-of-its-kind law that required a background check before every purchase of ammunition in California. “By subjecting Californians to background checks for all ammunition purchases,” Judge Sandra Ikuta wrote for the majority in Rhode v
Bonta, “California’s ammunition background check regime infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms
Furthermore, ” PETALUMA, CA - APRIL 02: Rounds of, amid market uncertainty. 223 rifle ammuntion sits on the counter at Sportsmans Arms on
In contrast, More April 2, 2013 in Petaluma, California. (Photo Illustration by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)Getty Images California’s regime dates back to 2016, when California voters apved position 63 by a margin of almost 2:1
Under the position, residents would pass an initial background check and then receive a four-year permit to purchase ammunition
However, California lawmakers am the law to only allow ammunition purchases in-person and after a background check each time
By requiring face-to-face transactions, California also banned both online sales and hibited Californians from buying ammunition out-of-state
Prior to California’s regime taking effect in July 2019, multiple plaintiffs, including Olympic gold medalist Kim Rhode and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, sued the state in 2018
On the other hand, To determine if California’s law was constitutional under the Second Amendment, the Ninth Circuit relied on a two-step test set by the Supreme Court in its 2022 landmark ruling, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v
Moreover, Under that decision’s framework, “when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively tects that conduct. ” If so, the government must then show that “the regulation is consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, in light of current trends
On the other hand, ” MORE FOR YOU In the California case, the Ninth Circuit determined that the Second Amendment tects “operable” arms, and “because arms are inoperable without ammunition, the right to keep and bear arms necessarily encompasses the right to have ammunition
At the same time, ” As a result, the court that “California’s ammunition background check meaningfully constrains the right to keep operable arms. ” To survive the second step of the Bruen test, California attempted to compare its background check system to a wide range of historical analogues, including loyalty oaths and disarmament visions from the American Revolution and Reconstruction
But the Ninth Circuit was left unconvinced. “None of the historical analogues ffered by California is within the relevant time frame, or is relevantly similar to California’s ammunition background check regime,” Ikuta found, and so, “California’s ammunition background check regime does not survive scrutiny under the two-step Bruen analysis
Additionally, ” In a sharply worded dissent, Judge Jay Bybee blasted the majority’s analysis as “twice-flawed. ” Noting that “the vast majority of its checks cost one dollar and impose less than one minute of delay,” Judge Bybee asserted that California’s background check system is “not the kind of heavy-handed regulation that meaningfully constrains the right to keep and bear arms (an important development). ” Notably, the California Department of Justice in 2024 received 191 reports of ammunition purchases from “armed and hibited individuals” who were denied by background check
Conversely, In dueling statements, the California Rifle & Pistol Association praised Thursday’s ruling against the state’s background check law as a “massive victory for gun owners in California,” while Gov, given the current landscape
Conversely, Gavin Newsom called the decision a “slap in the face, in this volatile climate
Additionally, ” Editorial StandardsRes & Permissions (quite telling).
Related Articles
More insights from FinancialBooklet