The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners, in a long-running legal challenge of California’s one-gun-per-month (OMG) law, have filed an appellee’s brief with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in response to the state’s effort to keep the law in place.
SAF won a summary judgement at the district court level, but California appealed. The case was originally filed in December 2020.
SAF is joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., San Diego County Gun Owners PAC, North County Shooting Center, Inc., PWGG, L.P., a limited partnership, and six private citizens including Michelle Nguyen, for whom the case Nguyen v. Bonta is named. They are represented by attorney Raymond M. DiGuiseppe of Southport, N.C.
“It should be clear to the court that the text of the Second Amendment covers the conduct prohibited by California’s OMG statute,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “The state argues that it’s restriction should be considered ‘presumptively lawful’ when it is plainly an unlawful ban on the otherwise lawful purchasing activity of honest citizens who simply wish to exercise their constitutionally protected rights for lawful purposes.”
“When examined in the proper historical context,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb observed, “it is obvious California’s OMG law is blatantly unconstitutional. There is no historical evidence of any such restriction anywhere in the country at the time the nation was created, and the Constitution was ratified. The Founders would never have considered such a prohibition. Indeed, they would have rejected it immediately as utter nonsense.”
