The U.S. Department of Justice has now added California to the list of states it is suing over unconstitutional state gun control laws.
The DOJ is coming for both the Glock ban and the Handgun Roster
On July 1, the DOJ filed the lawsuit United States v. California in an effort to halt the state’s newly enacted ban on Glocks and Glock-style pistols. The lawsuit also seeks to prevent enforcement of the state’s “Handgun Roster” — a list limiting legal firearms that individuals may purchase.
Blanche: California cannot ban the most popular handgun in America
According to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, the United States is challenging both as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
“The Second Amendment is a sacred right belonging to all Americans, even those in California. California cannot ban the most popular type of handgun in America,” Blanche said in a DOJ news release announcing the action. “We will work to stop this blatant trampling of our rights by the California government to protect the rights of lawful gun owners.”
California’s new law would ban the retail purchase of common handguns manufactured by Glock and guns with similar firing mechanisms. The state’s existing “Handgun Roster” further limits the types of handguns citizens can lawfully purchase in California.
The Wolford ruling already established what commonly used firearms means
The U.S. Supreme Court recently reaffirmed that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense in Wolford v. Lopez. In that ruling, the Court reiterated that states cannot prevent citizens from using commonly used firearms for self-defense.
Dhillon: The Civil Rights Division will defend Americans from unconstitutional state disarmament
Harmeet K. Dhillon, assistant attorney general with the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, said the lawsuit is part of the Trump Administration’s emphasis on trying to overturn unconstitutional state laws that infringe on lawful gun owners’ Second Amendment rights.
“The Civil Rights Division will defend law-abiding citizens from states that seek to disarm them illegally,” Dhillon said. “This lawsuit is yet another example of this Justice Department enforcing the Second Amendment by protecting citizens against unconstitutional state regulation of firearms.”
The DOJ Second Amendment Section has been busy this year
The Civil Rights Division’s Second Amendment Section has been busy of late challenging unjust and unconstitutional restrictions on gun owners in several states. Earlier this month, the DOJ filed a lawsuit against Virginia challenging Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s ban on common semi-auto firearms and standard-capacity firearm magazines. At the time, acting AG Blanche noted: “The Constitution is not a suggestion, and the Second Amendment is not a second-class right.”
In May, the DOJ filed a lawsuit challenging Denver’s ban on so-called “assault weapons,” with Blanche saying: “Denver’s ban on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles directly violates the right to bear arms. This Department of Justice will vigorously defend the liberties of law-abiding citizens nationwide.”
A day later, the DOJ sued Colorado over its ban on firearm magazines that can hold more than 15 rounds of ammo. Upon filing, Dhillon stated: “Colorado’s ban on certain magazines is political virtue signaling at the expense of Americans’ constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”
In addition to the lawsuits, the DOJ is also investigating the city of Philadelphia’s firearm permit revocation practices.
Lawyers and Judges defending the Constitution of The United States.
Whoopie just what Thomas Jefferson had envisioned.
Islamic Republic of Japan.
?
A country full of Teenage Muslim Ninja Warriors.
Sounds like we might need more then Glocks.
You do not have to be a genius to know and understand that magazine limitations and gun purchase limitations along with many other things are all infringements on the Second Amendment.
“You cannot ban your way to safety.
Disarming law-abiding people does not stop evil. It only makes sure good people have fewer options when evil shows up.
Evil people do evil things. You can’t make bad people harmless by making good people helpless.”
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. There are no qualifiers on who may keep arms, what types of arms they may keep, or for what purposes.
Gun laws only affect citizens not criminals.
All of these Glock bans are predicated on the contention that they are “easily converted” to fully automatic handguns and that they are therefore inherently dangerous. It does not matter that Glock does not make the conversion device, nor that converting a Glock (or similar) is a felony. It occurred to me last night that if these bans are allowed to stand, the same “reasoning” will be applied to ARs because with the right parts (made by others and not the manufacturers) and by drilling a couple of holes in the lower receiver, an AR can be “easily” converted to full auto. Again, it will not matter that the manufacturers do not produce the conversion parts and that doing the conversion is a felony. What is to stop them?
cunt ag bon-turd to the rescue