Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California One-Gun-A-Month Law

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit struck down California's 'one-gun-a-month' law, ruling it unconstitutional under the Second Amendment because it imposes an impermissible limitation on the right to acquire firearms. The court emphasized that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms in the plural and that temporal restrictions on constitutional rights, such as limiting purchases to one gun every 30 days, lack historical precedent and violate constitutional protections. The ruling followed a 2024 decision by a federal judge and applied the Supreme Court's precedent from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires firearm regulations to be grounded in historical tradition. The court rejected California’s argument that the law was a minor constraint since it did not prevent ownership of multiple firearms, highlighting that such rationing of rights is unprecedented and unacceptable. Plaintiffs, including gun owners and advocacy groups, hailed the decision as a significant victory for Second Amendment rights, asserting that rights should not be rationed by bureaucratic limits. This ruling sends a strong message that restrictions on the frequency of exercising constitutional rights, including firearm purchases, will face strict scrutiny under current constitutional standards.