NRA lawsuit targets state ammo laws
SACRAMENTO — The National Rif le Assn. and its state affiliate have f iled a fourth lawsuit against California over its gun control laws, this time challenging new restrictions on the sale and transfer of ammunition.
The NRA and the California Rif le and Pistol Assn. f iled a challenge in federal court to a requirement that ammunition sales and transfers be conducted “face to face” with California f irearms dealers or licensed vendors, ending purchases made directly from out- ofstate sellers on the internet. The lawsuit in the U. S. District Court for the Southern District of California also challenged a requirement starting next year for background checks for people buying ammunition.
The lawsuit was f iled in the name of Kim Rhode, a six- time Olympic medalwinning shooter, and others. It challenges California’s new ammunition sales restrictions as a violation of the 2nd Amendment and the commerce clause of the U. S. Constitution.
Restrictions on ammunition purchases were included in Proposition 63, approved by voters in 2016, and in bills approved by the Legislature.
“As a result of these laws, millions of constitutionally protected ammunition transfers are banned in California,” Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in a statement. “California’s law- abiding gun owners are sick of being treated like criminals and the NRA is proud to assist in this fight.”
Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is running for governor, defended his initiative and vowed to fight the lawsuit.
“We wrote Proposition 63 on solid legal ground and principle: If you’re a felon banned from possessing guns in California, then you should not be able to purchase the ammunition that makes a f irearm deadly,” Newsom said in a statement.
“California voters said loudly and clearly that guns and ammunition do not belong in the hands of dangerous individuals — but once again, the NRA has prioritized gun industry profits over the lives of lawabiding Californians.”