Courts Just Shut Down Another California Gun Control Law.

Published on September 1, 2025
Duration: 6:12

This video from Colion Noir breaks down the Ninth Circuit's decision to strike down California's ammunition background check law. The ruling found that the law, part of Proposition 63, unconstitutionally burdens the right to keep and bear arms by imposing fees and delays on ammunition purchases, including those from out-of-state. The expert analysis highlights the legal arguments against such regulations, emphasizing the distinction between rights and privileges.

Quick Summary

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down California's ammunition background check law, part of Proposition 63. The court ruled that the law unconstitutionally burdens the Second Amendment by imposing fees and delays on ammunition purchases, effectively turning a right into a privilege.

Chapters

  1. 00:00California Ammunition Background Check Law Struck Down
  2. 00:20Proposition 63 and Gavin Newsom's Role
  3. 00:33Lawsuit Against Background Check Rule
  4. 00:55Internet Sales Ban and Database Searches
  5. 01:15Fees and Justice Department Data
  6. 01:22Ninth Circuit Opinion Explained
  7. 01:41Newsom's Reaction and Gun Control Stance
  8. 02:05Colion's Rebuttal: Rights vs. Privileges
  9. 03:37Keeping California Safe and Crime
  10. 04:12Keep Texas Tactical Gear Promotion
  11. 05:47Support 2A Rights and Share Video

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the Ninth Circuit rule regarding California's ammunition background check law?

The Ninth Circuit struck down California's law requiring background checks for ammunition purchases. The court found that the law, part of Proposition 63, unconstitutionally burdened the Second Amendment rights of residents by imposing fees and delays on acquiring ammunition.

What was Proposition 63 in California?

Proposition 63, championed by Gavin Newsom, was a California initiative passed in 2016 that mandated background checks for ammunition purchases. It also included provisions for banning large-capacity magazines and requiring registration of assault weapons.

Why is the Ninth Circuit's ruling significant for gun rights?

The ruling is significant because it reaffirms that constitutional rights, like the right to bear arms, cannot be turned into privileges requiring government permission. It challenges the notion that extensive vetting for ammunition purchases is a necessary safety measure.

What are the arguments against ammunition background checks?

Arguments against ammunition background checks include that they punish law-abiding citizens, are ineffective against criminals who acquire firearms and ammo illegally, and transform a constitutional right into a privilege that requires government approval.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Colion Noir

View all →