By Glen Wunderlich
Charter Member Professional Outdoor Media Association (POMA)
California’s longtime ban on “assault weapons” has been overturned by Federal Judge Roger T. Benitez of San Diego. Judge Benitez writes, “Falling back on an old, recycled justification, the State says that its ban should stand because a person can have as many other rifles, shotguns, and pistols as one wants…Heller demolished that argument.
The same argument – that a handgun ban might be justified because government-approved alternatives are available – was rejected in Heller and it is rejected here. Heller said quite clearly that it is no constitutional answer for government to say that it is permissible to ban some guns so long as other guns are allowed.
This is not the way American Constitutional rights work. It is not permissible for a state to ban some books simply because there are other books to read, or to close synagogues because churches and mosques are open. In their normal configurations, the so-called “assault weapons” banned in California are modern firearms commonly-owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes across the nation. Under Heller, McDonald, Caetano, and Bruen, they may not be banned.”
Before anyone takes a victory lap, understand that in such a contest, the finish line is mere mirage, because the trend to win votes with window-dressing legislation shows no signs of letting up – with the exception of Florida (covered below). It doesn’t matter the outcome, as long as government can bleed Constitutional opponents dry.
Meantime, the irrationality of government’s misguided mandates is effectively in place, as time marches on to appeal – this time the 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco, where liberals are typically on friendly turf.
More taxpayer dollars will be injected into the foray of follies, but that’s only half of the equation. The Second Amendment Foundation’s Alan Gottlieb pegs the costs of contesting legislation in the courts at $250,000 to get started. Double that for an appeal and again when venturing into Supreme Court jurisdiction.
All the while government has no issue with funding, because it has unlimited access to other peoples’ money through taxes. Yes, one can fight city hall, but not without deep pockets.
The Constitutionally circumventing maneuvers by government are nothing new. Consider the words of Justice Benjamin Cardozo who wrote in The Nature of the Judicial Process, New Haven 1921, “The great ideals of liberty and equality are preserved against the assaults of opportunism, the expediency of the passing hour, the erosion of small encroachments, the scorn and derision of those who have no patience with general principles, by enshrining them in constitutions, and consecrating to the task of their protection a body of defenders.”
Duplicitous legislators, who violate their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution and then foist assaults of opportunism on their constituents, now have to think twice before jumping on the bandwagon of expediency in Florida. In a 4-1 decision, its Supreme Court reiterated the State’s preemption statute that prohibits cities and counties from passing their pet gun laws. The ruling also confirmed the financial penalties that public officials are subject to if they attempt to violate the state’s supremacy in all matters related to guns and ammunition. So there!
In any event, at this stage in the perpetual marathon for liberty, it’s refreshing to know that some judges carry the torch of our Founding Fathers’ wisdom yet to this day.
