Attorney General Bonta Files Motion to Stay Dangerous District Court Decision Overturning California’s Large-Capacity Magazine Ban

SACRAMENTO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today filed a motion in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to stay a district court decision striking down California’s restrictions on large-capacity magazines. The motion urges the Ninth Circuit to issue a stay of the decision pending appeal to ensure that these vital public safety protections remain in place to prevent gun-related deaths and injuries in California communities while the Ninth Circuit addresses the merits of the case.

“In the past half-century, large-capacity magazines have been used in about three-quarters of gun massacres with 10 or more deaths and in 100 percent of gun massacres with 15 or more deaths,” said Attorney General Bonta. “We will continue to fight for California’s authority to keep our communities safe from weapon enhancements that cause mass casualties. The Supreme Court was clear that Bruen does not create a regulatory straitjacket for states and that cases should be evaluated on the text of the Second Amendment and its history and tradition of regulation. Instead, the district court’s opinion in this case focuses on the purported popularity of large-capacity magazines, and does not properly apply the legal standards set out in Bruen. The court got this dead wrong. The focus should be on the law, period. We will continue to push for commonsense, constitutional regulations that protect Californians’ rights to go about their business without fear of becoming victims of gun violence, while at the same time respecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners.”

The motion urges the Ninth Circuit to stay the district court decision enjoining California’s long-standing restrictions on large-capacity magazines, defined as firearm magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition. In the motion, Attorney General Bonta argues that the district court’s application of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen is deeply flawed and ignores relevant historical laws. In fact, since Bruen, 10 other federal district courts have considered Second Amendment challenges to similar restrictions on large-capacity magazines. All but one of those courts have rejected the challenge. These courts have repeatedly recognized that large-capacity magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment or that restrictions on such magazines are consistent with a historical tradition of regulating particularly dangerous weapons technologies as they spread and cause harm. The district court reached its decision by focusing on the supposed popularity of the technology and by ignoring relevant historical laws despite the guidance laid out by Bruen.

If the district court’s judgment were to take effect, it would create grave, immediate, and irreparable harm to California and its citizens. Without a stay of the district court's order, long-prohibited large-capacity magazines would flood California in large numbers, with no reasonable prospect for their recovery. 

A copy of the motion can be found here.