NRA Files Amicus Brief Urging Ninth Circuit to Rehear Challenge to California’s Gun Store Surveillance Law En Banc

The National Rifle Association of America, along with the America First Policy Institute and Knox Williams, founder of the American Suppressor Association, filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to rehear Richards v. Newsom en banc. The case challenges a California law requiring federally licensed firearms dealers to maintain continuous audio and video surveillance of their premises.

California Penal Code § 26806 requires every federally licensed firearms dealer in the state to record audio and video inside its premises around the clock and retain the recordings for at least one year. The law applies even to home-based firearms dealers and allows state agents to inspect surveillance systems without a warrant to verify compliance.

Our brief argues that California’s sweeping surveillance mandate violates the First Amendment by chilling the speech and associational rights of lawful firearm purchasers and sellers. Gun stores are places where customers and owners discuss the Second Amendment, exchange ideas, and engage in political activity. Requiring conversations and the identities of those involved to be continuously recorded and preserved for potential government use can deter people from speaking candidly, asking questions, and associating with others. The brief explains that the absence of an express prohibition on speech does not eliminate the constitutional concerns raised by government surveillance and its chilling effects.

The Ninth Circuit panel rejected the First Amendment challenge, concluding that the plaintiffs had not adequately alleged that the law regulates speech, that the government would take adverse action against speakers, or that the alleged chilling effect was supported by concrete facts. Our brief urges the court to reconsider that conclusion in light of Supreme Court precedent protecting freedom of association and guarding against subtle government interference with the exercise of First Amendment rights. The brief emphasizes that the Second Amendment does not exist in isolation from the other guarantees of the Bill of Rights and that the court should consider the substantial speech and associational interests implicated by California’s surveillance regime.

Please stay tuned to www.nraila.org for future updates on NRA-ILA’s ongoing efforts to defend your constitutional rights, and please visit www.nraila.org/litigation to keep up to date on NRA-ILA’s ongoing litigation efforts.