Previous Post
Next Post
Xavier Becerra (D-Ca.) Via
Xavier Becerra (D-Ca.) Via

Californians who may have been relieved that the election of Kamala Harris to the U.S. Senate represented a Dilbert Principle-style promotion of an incompetent to a position where she could not do as much damage, saw their relief slip away with Gov. Jerry Brown’s announcement that he was appointing Rep. Xavier Becerra as her replacement.

Governor Moonbeam proclaimed that he was “confident [Becerra] will be a champion for all Californians and help our state aggressively combat climate change,” according to the Sacramento Bee. It’s an odd goal to set for an Attorney-General, but no matter.

California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon praised the appointment, declaring that Becerra “respects the rights of all Californians.” Something that we in the law trade call a “lie”.

Becerra is well-known for taking a bold stand against concepts like due process and the right to keep and bear arms, both of which are rights long considered fundamental to a Constitutional Republic.

In this year alone, in the wake of the Islamic terrorist attack on an LGBT-friendly nightclub in Florida, Becerra urged passage of a bill that would have eviscerated the former in hopes of destroying the latter. “It’s time for us to stand and do something,” he pronounced.

At the same time, he averred that he would be happy to ban various kinds of rifles simply because he didn’t like how they looked. In July, Becerra continued his assault on the Bill of Rights, urging the abolition of private sales of firearms nationwide.

Becerra also joined in the shrill and futile “No Bill No Break” shutdown of Congress this summer to try to force the passage of the legislation that would have damaged protections for both the right to due process and the right to keep and bear arms. Needless to say, his “F” rating from the National Rifle Association was well-earned.

So that’s California new Attorney General-designee. In almost any other state, this person would be subject to intense scrutiny by the legislature. In California’s political monoculture, he should be a shoo-in.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • Dilbert goes one step further: the most incompetent people in any organization are inevitably promoted to management, where they can directly harm nothing and indirectly damage everything.

  1. He WILL be a shoe-in. When the next Legislature is seated, it will have a Democratic Party supermajority. Most of that majority not only hates guns, but loves to dump owners into Hillary’s basket of despicables and deplorables, to the point of saying so on the record in committee hearings, with the purpose of shutting down any meaningful opportunity for the opposition to their onerous bills to populate the record with the facts they refuse to hear.

  2. It’s simply too tempting to write off California as a lost cause… well, here’s hoping the rest of the states can continue to lead by example and prove that what California does doesn’t predict what the rest of us will do.

    • California will be changed from the outside, so the hope is the Supreme Court. If over time, decisions are handed down that strike down their restrictive laws.

      • The south changed over a very long period of time. The forces of the federal government had no effect. The culture of California has changed. California is in the same way. Virginia closed all public schools rather than desegregate by federal order.

        I fully expect elected California officials to ignore federal courts on second amendment when the case favors the individual.
        President Kennedy never put a southern politician in jail for violating black civil rights.
        Will President Trump arrest them? I don’t know.

        • Decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education were necessary, and Eisenhower federalized the National Guard to allow students to attend school in Arkansas pursuant to that ruling, acting against the opposition of governor, and many of the public. That was pretty extreme, but I don’t know if it needs to go that far. If the a Supreme Court ruling is clearly not on your side, and the composition of the court doesn’t indicate a reversal, defending a law that’s going to get tossed is an expensive proposition. A Supreme Court that’s solidly, unambiguously 5-4 or 6-3 pro-gun will make the specter of a lawsuit against an anti-gun law much more threatening. The SAF was able to get several localities to repeal laws in violation of preemption statutes by simply sending them letters notifying them they were in violation of preemption, and if it wasn’t addressed, they should expect to be sued.

          Some places will resist this. Maybe California will insist on fighting every case in court. Maybe if it gets bad enough, the Supreme Court will force compliance through consent decrees. That would mirror how school desegregation happened, and maybe that’s how gun rights restoration will need to happen in California.

  3. California needs a shakeup. The big one can’t come fast enough.

    In the mean time I’ll settle for Calexit and a wall.

  4. The other day, I posted a comment that said Big Money wins. Where is the most Big Money in the U.S.? California and New York. Which two states have the most restrictive firearm laws and the most liberal influence in their state legislatures, executive branch, and judicial branch? California and New York.

    This “situation” in California will continue until Big Money evaporates in California, which means never.

  5. California is one of 5 states without a right to bear arms in its State Constitution and will simply refuse to obey Federal laws or SCOTUS that conflict with its own gun restrictions.

    California was Republican until Pete Wilson forever tied Republicans to Prop 187’s perceived racist policies. Maybe it’s time for California Republicans to pull a Reagan with immigration amnesty and bring back Hispanics to the Republican side.
    What is clear is that birth rates have the under 30 population in California majority Hispanic. The party that can win Hispanic votes wins the state.

    • Given how nervous Illinois got when the Federal Circuit imposed an order invalidating its ban on concealed carry, I doubt it would be different in California. The reasoning is simple. If a federal court declares a law unconstitutional, then it is unconstitutional for a state court to enforce the law in the course of a criminal prosecution, meaning you end up with constitutional carry unless a compliant law is passed. See, e.g, Illinois, D.C.

      Right now, the Ninth Circuit has placed California (and the Ninth Circuit Court itself) in a a rather uncomfortable position. In the en banc Peruta decision (for which, by the way, a petition for review will be filed in SCOTUS) and based on a very narrow reading of the claims that were brought, the Court determined that there is no right to carry a concealed weapon. This determination on its face (and without reference to the larger picture of California law today) seems defensible, even under Scalia’s discussion of the law in D.C. v. Heller, because of the numerous state decisions (as cited in Heller) that upheld laws banning concealed carry.

      What the Ninth “cleverly” avoided was the fact that open carry is illegal in California in most circumstances in all incorporated cities and towns, obviously the places where the concern for self defense is at its highest. The Court explicitly left open the issue of whether there is a constitutional right to openly carry firearms for the purpose of self defense, an issue that is now pending before the Court in the Nichols case. If the Court were to uphold the open carry ban, that would mean that for the vast majority of Californians there is no right to bear arms outside the home, a very narrow reading of Heller that is difficult even for the most creative gun banner to sustain, leaving the case extraordinarily ripe for Supreme Court review. And if it strikes down the law, then California is put to the choice of going shall issue concealed carry or succumbing to the inevitability of open carry. Its only fall back would be a return to the former “open unloaded” laws that were in effect prior to 2013 that lead to so much consternation among the soccer om set that it took only months to pass a law banning the practice.

      • “If a federal court declares a law unconstitutional, then it is unconstitutional for a state court to enforce the law in the course of a criminal prosecution, meaning you end up with constitutional carry unless a compliant law is passed. See, e.g, Illinois, D.C. ”

        Which is why the black-robed tyrants stay their decisions overturning laws for 180 days after declaring the laws unconstitutional, to give the violators of the Constitution a chance to enact a new violation before the old one expires. They only do this for 2A violators, of course. See Illinois and DC for example. Then the violators fritter away their 180 day cushion, and motion the judge for more time.

  6. Before President-Elect Trump, I had no hope of California being brought to heel of the US Constitution, as we get closer to the pending recount fiasco and the attempt to push the election results to Congress, I now have a small ray of light piercing the veil of Democratic super majority control and general dumboness.

    To all the former Californians out there in gun land, I envy you’s guys @ gals.

  7. “California’s New AG Xavier Becerra is Hostile to Gun Rights, Due Process”

    Then it is the Right and Duty of the Gun Rights people to be “hostile” to the AG’s rights.
    With extrememe prejudice.

  8. Beccera’s parents were in this country illegally when he was born in California and he claims to be a citizen under the flawed logic and practice of the Fourteenth Amendment.
    So it’s no surprise that despite completing a law degree by virtue of affirmative action, lowered standards and charity Beccera still embraces the political philosophy of the Third World socialist tyranny whence he came.
    This appointment will be another affirmation of the virtual annexation of California by Mexico.
    And in two years the former thug, crony Mexican Mayor of Los Angeles will be running for Governor.
    California is now “The Bulge” in our war against globalism.

  9. His constituents — illegal immigrants, dreamers, drug cartels, MS-13 and the herds of illiterate, impoverished masses now in transit — will have their illegal arsenals thanks to federal programs like Fast & Furious and obamaism.
    Along with obama, Lynch, Holder and their militant-seditious ilk, Beccera wants to disarm white legitimate American citizens in preparation for the final takedown and South Africanization/Zimbabweism of America.

  10. Trump’s Wall should extend along the California Border all the way up past Oregon and Washington to the Canadian Border. Only gun owners allowed to leave.

Comments are closed.