Fortune | FORTUNE 07月25日 16:20
Federal court rules California voter-passed law that requires background checks to buy bullets is unconstitutional
index_new5.html
../../../zaker_core/zaker_tpl_static/wap/tpl_guoji1.html

 

一项旨在通过背景调查来限制枪支暴力的加州法律,近日被联邦上诉法院裁定违宪。该法要求选民在购买子弹时进行背景审查,但法院认为此举过度限制了宪法赋予的持枪权,因为子弹是枪支运作的必需品。加州州长表示失望,认为此判决削弱了控枪努力,而支持者则认为该法律是“荒谬的限制”,剥夺了合法枪支拥有者的权利。此裁决可能对加州其他收紧枪支管制的法律产生影响,因为法院正依据历史传统来评估枪支法规的合宪性。

🎯 加州弹药背景调查法被联邦上诉法院裁定违宪,该法要求选民在购买子弹时进行背景审查,并已于2019年生效。

⚖️ 法院认为,该法律通过要求枪支拥有者在每次购买子弹前接受重新审查,从而“有意义地限制”了宪法规定的持有武器的权利,因为“持有和携带武器的权利包含操作它们的权利,而这需要弹药”。

🗣️ 加州州长 Gavin Newsom 对此判决表示不满,认为其“是对加州近年来为保障社区安全所取得进展的打脸”,并强调加州选民支持弹药背景调查,他们的声音应被重视。

🏢 加州司法部对裁决表示失望,称该法是“至关重要且挽救生命的措施,它堵塞了一个危险的漏洞”,并表示将研究法律选项以寻求保护。

✊ 支持枪支权利的组织认为该法律“荒谬地限制”,并指出“枪支若没有可操作的弹药则无法有效运作”,州政府试图剥夺他们的权利,而他们的行动被证明是违宪的。

A voter-backed California law requiring background checks for people who buy bullets is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday in a blow to the state’s efforts to combat gun violence.

In upholding a 2024 ruling by a lower court, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law violates the Second Amendment. Voters passed the law in 2016 and it took effect in 2019.

Many states, including California, make people pass a background check before they can buy a gun. California went a step further by requiring a background check, which costs either $1 or $19 depending on eligibility, every time someone buys bullets.

Last year, U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez decided that the law was unconstitutional because if people can’t buy bullets, they can’t use their guns for self-defense.

The 9th Circuit agreed. Writing for two of the three judges on the appellate panel, Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta said the law “meaningfully constrains” the constitutional right to keep arms by forcing gun owners to get rechecked before each purchase of bullets.

“The right to keep and bear arms incorporates the right to operate them, which requires ammunition,” the judge wrote.

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who supported the background checks, decried the court’s decision.

“Strong gun laws save lives — and today’s decision is a slap in the face to the progress California has made in recent years to keep its communities safer from gun violence,” Newsom said in a statement. “Californians voted to require background checks on ammunition and their voices should matter.”

The California Department of Justice said the state needs “common-sense, lifesaving” laws that prevent ammunition from falling into the wrong hands.

“We are deeply disappointed in today’s ruling — a critical and lifesaving measure that closes a dangerous loophole,” the department said in a statement. “Our families, schools, and neighborhoods deserve nothing less than the most basic protection against preventable gun violence, and we are looking into our legal options.”

Chuck Michel, president and general counsel of the California Rifle & Pistol Association, called the law “absurdly restrictive.”

“This case has been a long hard fight against overreaching government gun control, but a firearm cannot be effective without the ammunition to make it operable. The state of California continues to try to strip our rights, and we continue to prove their actions are unconstitutional,” Michel said.

The law remained in effect while the state appealed the lower court’s decision. Benitez had criticized the state’s automated background check system, which he said rejected about 11% of applicants, or 58,087 requests, in the first half of 2023.

California’s law was meant to help police find people who have guns illegally, such as convicted felons, people with certain mental illnesses and people with some domestic violence convictions. Sometimes they order kits online and assemble guns in their home. The guns don’t have serial numbers and are difficult for law enforcement to track, but the people who own them show up in background checks when they try to buy bullets.

John Parkin, president of Coyote Point Armory in Burlingame, California, said the law made it difficult or impossible for some legal gun owners to purchase ammunition. For example, out-of-state residents and California residents with old guns couldn’t buy bullets because they weren’t in the database of approved gun owners, he said.

“It was written to make California gun owners angry. There wasn’t a lot of logic to it,” Parkin said about the law. “I think there are better ways to keep the public safe.”

California has some of the nation’s toughest gun laws. Many of them are being challenged in court in light of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that set a new standard for interpreting gun laws. The decision said gun laws must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

Two other California gun laws were struck down in recent years — one that banned detachable magazines that can hold more than 10 bullets and another that banned the sale of assault-style weapons. Those decisions have been appealed. Other laws being challenged include rules requiring gun stores to have digital surveillance systems and restrictions on the sale of new handguns.

Introducing the 2025 Fortune 500

, the definitive ranking of the biggest companies in America. 

Explore this year's list.

Fish AI Reader

Fish AI Reader

AI辅助创作,多种专业模板,深度分析,高质量内容生成。从观点提取到深度思考,FishAI为您提供全方位的创作支持。新版本引入自定义参数,让您的创作更加个性化和精准。

FishAI

FishAI

鱼阅,AI 时代的下一个智能信息助手,助你摆脱信息焦虑

联系邮箱 441953276@qq.com

相关标签

加州 枪支管制 弹药背景调查 第二修正案 联邦法院
相关文章