BREAKING NEWS: Insane California Law Violates Second Amendment Lawsuits

Published on July 18, 2022
Duration: 10:58

Constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith provides an expert analysis of California's SB 1327, a law designed to deter Second Amendment lawsuits by imposing severe financial penalties on losing plaintiffs and their legal teams. Smith argues this law infringes on the First Amendment right to petition and may conflict with federal statutes, creating a significant chilling effect on legal challenges to firearm regulations.

Quick Summary

Constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith explains that California's SB 1327 imposes severe financial penalties, including attorney fees and costs, on plaintiffs who lose Second Amendment lawsuits. He argues this law violates the First Amendment right to petition and may conflict with federal law, creating a chilling effect on legal challenges to gun regulations.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Host Introduction and Credentials
  2. 00:35California SB 1327 Overview
  3. 01:12Attorney Fee Shifting Provisions
  4. 03:00Joint and Several Liability
  5. 05:45First Amendment Challenges
  6. 06:21Poll Tax Analogy
  7. 07:23Federal Supremacy Clause Conflict
  8. 09:19Chilling Effect on Litigation

Frequently Asked Questions

What is California's SB 1327 and how does it affect Second Amendment lawsuits?

California's SB 1327 is an amendment to the Code of Civil Procedure that requires plaintiffs, organizations, and law firms to pay all attorney fees and costs if they lose any part of a lawsuit challenging gun laws. This creates a significant financial risk for those who challenge firearm regulations.

How does SB 1327 potentially violate constitutional rights?

Constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith argues that SB 1327 violates the First Amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances. He likens its financial barriers to a 'poll tax,' potentially deterring individuals from exercising their constitutional rights.

What is the primary intent behind California's SB 1327?

The primary intent of SB 1327 is to create a 'chilling effect' on Second Amendment litigation. By imposing extreme financial risks, the law aims to discourage individuals, organizations, and law firms from bringing lawsuits that challenge existing firearm regulations.

Does SB 1327 conflict with federal law?

Mark W. Smith suggests that SB 1327 likely conflicts with federal civil rights statutes, such as 42 USC 1983 and 1988, and the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution. This potential conflict could be grounds for legal challenges against the state law.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from The Four Boxes Diner

View all →