California | Supreme Court Denial of Review in 10-Day Waiting Period Laws

10-day waiting period
10-day waiting period

WASHINGTON, D.C.-(Ammoland.com)- The Calguns Foundation has issued the following statement regarding the Supreme Court’s decision to not review a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that upheld California’s 10-day waiting period for existing gun owners who pass a background check:

We are disappointed, but not entirely surprised, that the Court has once again decided against taking up a Second Amendment challenge to plainly unconstitutional laws.

In his important 14-page dissent from the Court’s denial of certiorari, Justice Clarence Thomas detailed why the Ninth Circuit applied an improper “deferential analysis” that was “indistinguishable from rational-basis review,” showing “the lower courts’ general failure to afford the Second Amendment the respect due an enumerated constitutional right.”

We agree with Justice Thomas that the Ninth Circuit’s “double standard is apparent from other cases,” like one where it invalidated an Arizona law partly because it “delayed” women seeking an abortion, and another where it struck down a Washington county’s 5-day waiting period for adult dancing licenses because it “unreasonably prevent[ed] a dancer from exercising first amendment rights while an application [was] pending.”

As Justice Thomas explained, the “Ninth Circuit would not have done this for any other constitutional right, and it could not have done this unless it was applying rational-basis review.” He is, of course, correct—just as we have maintained throughout the course of this appeal and in our briefing to the Supreme Court. But in the Ninth Circuit, it appears, “rights that have no basis in the Constitution receive greater protection than the Second Amendment, which is enumerated in the text.”

From the bottom of our hearts, we wish to thank every single supporter who generously helped us litigate this long-running case through trial and up to the Supreme Court. We also want to thank amici Cato Institute, Crime Prevention Research Center, Firearms Policy Coalition, Madison Society Foundation, Gun Owners of California, and Firearms Policy Foundation for their excellent briefs in support of our case and the cause of individual liberty.

The Calguns Foundation will continue to challenge unconstitutional gun control laws until the Second Amendment takes its place as a peer among fundamental rights, like those in the First Amendment, rather than the “constitutional orphan” and “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees” that it is in the Ninth Circuit today.

A copy of Justice Thomas’s dissent and all Supreme Court filings in Silvester v. Becerra can be viewed or downloaded at https://www.calgunsfoundation.org/silvester.

The Calguns Foundation (www.calgunsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that serves its members, supporters, and the public through educational, cultural, and judicial efforts to advance Second Amendment and related civil rights.


About The Calguns Foundation:Calguns Foundation

The Calguns Foundation is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that serves its members, supporters, and the public through educational, cultural, and judicial efforts to defend and advance Second Amendment and related civil rights.

Supporters may visit their website to join or donate to CGF.

4 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Shiver Metimbers

Nice to see Gorsuch hung us out to dry. We need Ginsburg to hurry up and die already.

UpChuckLiberals

Did Gorsuch agree with the majority or was he the one that said they wouldn’t review it?

William

I had to move my family out of California because their gun laws made me a criminal. I see now how the people felt when they had to leave their countries and go to the U.S. Montana is filling up with California refugees.

JS

God, be careful with those Californians. One minute they are breathing free air, the next they will want to ban open carry is case they offend their own kids, because they wont have an honest discussion with them. Something like “these are rights and these people are standing up against tyranny and bad government” Something like that 🙂