Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN Legal & Legislation

California Court of Appeals Confirms Ruling Striking Down Ammunition Sales Restrictions

Thursday, November 7, 2013

On November 6, 2013, the California Court of Appeals for the 5th District affirmed the lower court’s issuance of a permanent injunction in the NRA/CRPA backed legal challenge to Assembly Bill (AB) 962, Parker v. California.  AB 962 would have banned mail order ammunition sales and required all purchases of so-called "handgun ammunition" to be registered.   The court’s 41 page published opinion confirms that AB 962 is unconstitutionally vague and cannot be enforced. 

The appellate decision comes approximately two years after the trial court issued a dramatic ruling giving gun owners a win just days before the law was set to take effect in 2010.   The appellate court’s decision confirms that mail order ammunition sales to California can continue and ammunition sales need not be registered under current law.

The lawsuit, litigated by the NRA’s California counsel at Michel and Associates, P.C., was prompted in part by the many objections and questions raised by confused police, ammunition purchasers, and sellers about what ammunition would have been covered by AB 962.  In a move that reflects growing law enforcement opposition to ineffective gun control laws, former Tehama County Sheriff Clay Parker was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit.  Other plaintiffs included the CRPA Foundation, Herb Bauer Sporting Goods, ammunition shipper Able’s Ammo, collectible ammunition shipper RTG Sporting collectibles and individual Steven Stonecipher.

In addition to these plaintiffs, Mendocino Sheriff Tom Allman, along with ammunition shippers Midway USA, Natchez Shooters Supplies and Cheaper Than Dirt also submitted declarations in support of the lawsuit.  Amicus briefs were submitted to the Court of Appeals by the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, Gun Owners of California, and FFLGuard.

The Court of Appeals agreed with plaintiffs’ claims that AB 962 is unconstitutionally vague because it fails to provide sufficient notice of what ammunition is "principally for use in a handgun," and thus considered "handgun ammunition" under the law.  The court explained that it would be practically impossible for consumers, retailers, and law enforcement to determine whether any of the thousands of different types of ammunition cartridges that can be used in handguns are actually used more often in a handgun.  The proportional usage of any given cartridge is impossible to determine, and it changes with market demands.

The legislature itself was well aware of the vagueness problem with AB 962 and tried, but failed, to redefine the law.  Rather than provide a clear list of the ammunition that would be prohibited, however, the legislature used the amendments as an attempt to expand the law to apply to even more types of ammunition, and also tried to expand the law in other ways.

The opinion also confirmed the applicable standard of review that should be applied in constitutional vagueness challenges, a larger legal issue that has been unsettled by the courts for years.  The Court expressly confirmed that a law need not be vague in every conceivable application to be found unconstitutionally vague on its face, particularly when the law regulates constitutionally-protected activity, in this case the transfer of ammunition. In that respect the opinion brings some much needed clarity to this general area of the law.

Despite this common sense win over ill-conceived and counter-productive laws, additional legislation on this and related subjects will no doubt be proposed in the future.   Those who believe in the right to keep and bear arms must stay informed and make their voices heard in Sacramento.  To help, sign up for legislative alerts at www.nraila.com and www.calnra.com and respond when called upon.  To assist in the fight against these persistent attacks on gun owners’ rights in California, please also donate to the NRA Legal Action Project today. 

Second Amendment supporters should also be careful about supporting well intentioned, but unfortunately counterproductive litigation brought by individuals and groups without access to the necessary funding, relationships, firearm experts, and experienced lawyers on the NRA's national legal team.  The NRA's team of highly regarded civil rights attorneys and scholars has the resources, skill, and expertise to maximize the potential for victory. For a summary of the many actions the NRA legal team has taken or is currently taking on behalf of California gun owners, click here.

 

TRENDING NOW
U.S. House Passes Reconciliation Bill, Removing Suppressors from the National Firearms Act

News  

Second Amendment  

Thursday, May 22, 2025

U.S. House Passes Reconciliation Bill, Removing Suppressors from the National Firearms Act

Earlier today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R.1 the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which included Section 2 of the Hearing Protection Act, completely removing suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA).

Minnesota: Removal of Shotgun-Only Hunting Zones Added to Environmental Omnibus Bill

Friday, June 6, 2025

Minnesota: Removal of Shotgun-Only Hunting Zones Added to Environmental Omnibus Bill

This week outside of regular session, the Environment Omnibus bill was agreed upon. This omnibus bill would remove shotgun-only hunting zones in the state. A special session has been scheduled for Monday, June 9th, for the ...

North Carolina: Permitless Carry Bill Headed to Governor Stein

Wednesday, June 11, 2025

North Carolina: Permitless Carry Bill Headed to Governor Stein

Today, the House of Representatives voted 59-48 to pass Senate Bill 50 (S50), Freedom to Carry NC. The bill now heads to Governor Josh Stein for consideration.

NRA-ILA Petitions the U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to NFA Restrictions on Short-Barreled Rifles

News  

Second Amendment  

Friday, June 6, 2025

NRA-ILA Petitions the U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to NFA Restrictions on Short-Barreled Rifles

Today, the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) filed a Petition for Certiorari requesting that the U.S. Supreme Court hear a challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934’s restrictions on short-barreled rifles ...

Mexico, U.S. Gun Control Activists Lose Big at Supreme Court

News  

Monday, June 9, 2025

Mexico, U.S. Gun Control Activists Lose Big at Supreme Court

For the second year in a row, gun control advocates have lost a unanimous decision at the U.S. Supreme Court. 

NRA Praises Supreme Court Decision in Smith & Wesson v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos

News  

Second Amendment  

Thursday, June 5, 2025

NRA Praises Supreme Court Decision in Smith & Wesson v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in the closely watched case, Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, unanimously holding that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act ...

Supreme Court Rejects Hardware Cases, Lets Record of Anti-gun Defiance Build

News  

Monday, June 9, 2025

Supreme Court Rejects Hardware Cases, Lets Record of Anti-gun Defiance Build

Last week, after they were re-listed for conference 15 times, the U.S. Supreme Court finally denied petitions for review on two major Second Amendment cases, with just one vote shy of the four needed for review. 

Loot Canal: U.S. Taxpayers Funded Bizarre Dental “Gun Violence” Research

News  

Monday, June 2, 2025

Loot Canal: U.S. Taxpayers Funded Bizarre Dental “Gun Violence” Research

When the Biden-Harris administration made clear they intended to use a “whole-of-government” approach to suppress Second Amendment rights, few could have predicted their efforts would extend all the way to the dentist’s office.

NRA Files Amicus Brief Urging SCOTUS to Hear Challenge to Ban on Firearms Possession by Nonviolent Felons

Wednesday, June 11, 2025

NRA Files Amicus Brief Urging SCOTUS to Hear Challenge to Ban on Firearms Possession by Nonviolent Felons

Today, the National Rifle Association, along with the Second Amendment Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, and FPC Action Foundation, filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a challenge to the federal lifetime ...

Pennsylvania and Virginia Sign Mutual Concealed Carry Reciprocity Agreement

Wednesday, June 11, 2025

Pennsylvania and Virginia Sign Mutual Concealed Carry Reciprocity Agreement

Recently, both Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares and Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday signed a reciprocity agreement offered by Pennsylvania to Virginia.

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.