CA Supreme Court Rules Law Requiring the Impossible is Constitutional

California Supreme Court Rules Law Requiring the Impossible is Constitutional
California Supreme Court Rules Law Requiring the Impossible is Constitutional

Arizona -(Ammoland.com)- In 2007, California passed a law requiring all new semi-automatic handgun models have dual stamp micro-stamping incorporated in their design. Because of legal challenges, the law did not go into effect until 2013. In 2013, California AG Kamala Harris insisted on enforcing the law. No new handgun models have been added to the California handgun roster since that time.

Manufacturers have stated that dual microstamping, as required by the California law, is technologically and commercially impossible. The State appeals court ruling was appealed to the California Supreme Court, on the grounds that the law cannot require an impossibility.

On June 28, 2018, the California Supreme Court ruled the State legislature can require impossible things, if that was the legislature's intent.  From sfchronicle.com:

Gun manufacturers must do their best to comply with a California law requiring new models of semiautomatic handguns to imprint their bullets with identifying micro stamps so police can trace them, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday, rejecting the companies’ arguments that the law should be overturned because compliance is technologically impossible.

A gun-control advocate said the ruling preserves safety regulations that encourage industries to develop new technologies. A gun organization’s lawyer said the state is headed for a “slow-motion handgun ban.”

The gun law, passed in 2007, is supported by police organizations that say the stamps would help officers to determine the source of bullets found at crime scenes. It requires that new brands of semiautomatic pistols introduced for retail sale in California carry markings in two places that would imprint the gun’s model and serial number on each cartridge as it is fired.

A federal legal challenge to the law on Second Amendment grounds was filed in June of 2013.  The district court upheld the law. An appeal was filed in the Ninth Circuit. The oral arguments were heard on March 16th, 2017, over a year ago, by a three judge panel. Here is a video summation of the oral arguments done by CalGuns.

The Ninth Circuit still has not ruled, over a year later. If the the three judge panel in the Ninth rules for the Second Amendment, I expect a judge on the Ninth will demand a vote for an en banc ruling by the entire Ninth Circuit. That has been the pattern for recent Second Amendment cases in the Ninth Circuit.

The Ninth Circuit, en banc, has been ideologically hostile to the Second Amendment.

A new Supreme Court justice, appointed by President Donald Trump to replace retiring Justice Kennedy, should be on the Supreme Court by the time the Court would be called to hear an appeal from the Ninth Circuit on this case.

That might, or might not make the difference in whether or not the Supreme Court would decide to hear an appeal of the case.

The Supreme Court has been able to pick and choose what cases it will hear since 1891. In 1891, the legislature gave the power to refuse cases to the Supreme Court, in order to reduce the Courts workload. Instead of being heard by the Supreme Court, most cases are heard by the appellate courts.

The Ninth Circuit has become the Circuit with the highest percentage of decisions overturned by the Supreme Court.

©2018 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.

Link to Gun Watch


About Dean Weingarten:Dean Weingarten

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

  • 23 thoughts on “CA Supreme Court Rules Law Requiring the Impossible is Constitutional

    1. Just about any stamping feature can be defeated, the criminals even figured out how to
      obscure the serial numbers on firearms, car VIN’s, etc etc etc.

    2. Once again this is an example of a freedom once lost, is lost forever. The Democrats (Commnists) are masters at taking away one’s freedoms a bite at a time. They infiltrate the court system with judges that will act as ideological servants for them and uphold their very oppressive and unconstitutional laws. Unlike the Republicans, they never back down. Lastly, the SCOTUS, has not been a friend of the 2nd Amendment. They either refuse to hear cases brought to them by pro-2nd Amendment groups or they rule against the right to keep and bear arms without considering “shall not be infringed”. As stated early in my comment, gun ownership has lost a large portion of it’s freedoms and I fear it is lost forever.

      1. The Constitution is a flawed document, even Patrick Henry refused to attend the Constitutional Convention because he “smelled a rat”! Watch this explanation to the end!!!

        1. Rattlerjake, so what do you propose we do to replace/revert this? How do we legislate responsibility and replace that with our rights as protected by our Constitution? He didn’t state it directly, but implies that he believes in theocracy over our current form of government. Do you believe the same? We have seen what theocracies do past and present – much worse than our current Byzantine laws and rights have created. I do agree that we need a “reset” in that our government has strayed far from the beliefs outlined by our founding fathers.

          1. I provided this to show the rest of conservatives exactly what we are fighting. By the way the Constitution was written, instead of actually limiting gov’t, it has made it easy for them to usurp our “RESPONSIBILITIES” by calling them rights or privileges. If the Constitution was really working, then there would be no laws violating our rights, and any time one was created it would immediately be void; nor would we have scumbags i office because when they break the law they would be removed and punished. Instead we are spinning our wheels with constant lawsuits where the SCOTUS gives us a win, here and there, to keep us happy.
            Weiland was NOT advocating a theocracy, we could still have a system of government and Constitution, but it needs to be aligned with God’s law, considering that is what most moral laws have been based on since the beginning of man.. Sadly, it is far too late for that because perversion, false religions, feminism, adultery, corruption, immorality, etc. are too prevalent in our country and OK’d under our present Constitution AND the rest of the world follows the same basic sinful ideology.
            Instead of fighting “unconstitutional laws” based solely on them violating our “rights”, we could also establish that they are an inherent “responsibility” of ALL men, a responsibility that cannot be given or taken away! As well we would need to go back to GOD’s form of punishment, that we followed as recent as 100-150 years ago, where punishments fit the crime and only “crimes” were punishable. For instance, running a stop sign is NOT a crime, it is a corporate statute used for control and added revenue, so there should be no punishment for violating it. A stop sign is provided simply to inform everyone of a possible safety hazard. It is a person’s responsibility to be alert and attentive, not for gov’t to dictate our every move! We now have generations of people who have no idea how to accept responsibility for themselves and their actions.

    3. Ok all you illegals and gang bangers. California is now accomidating you to do as much as you desire. Feel free to leave other states and move there. The governor says you can camp outin front of his house.

    4. A clear sign of communism to pass a law, and defend it, that can not be followed. They have gone way beyond ridiculous and who was at the head of this one their rising star who is feeding the swamp in D.C. now. She is definitely shit for brains.

    5. Tell all ammo producers that sell to LE departments to STOP Only sell to gun stores and force LE’s to buy ammo from them

    6. It started with the type of people elected to law making positions, members of the legislature, and other elected offices, such as State AG.Of course, the members of the federal courts are appointed, with senate approval, which raises even more questions. It strikes me that for to many years, the people of California have paid scant attention to who they were voting into,legislative offices, a mistake that has come back to haunt them.

    7. Psst, California; you are only punishing honest citizens. Criminals don’t, and will never, care about your laws.

    8. My question is when is the next big Quake set to hit California maybe we will be lucky and it will fall into the Pacific Ocean?????? If not all manufactures of guns and ammo should stop selling to any government agency much as they are doing to Dick’s they seem to all run the same sort of mind set, LIQUID MUSH FOR BRAINS!!!!!!!!!

    9. Hmmm…. my brain hurts.

      SUPPOSEDLY intelligent, well-educated, experienced adults (in positions of societal importance) are now – somehow – convinced [at least, they publicly claim to be!] that a physically/technologically-impossible (and completely unenforceable) law… is nonetheless Constitutional.

      “Shit for brains” comes to mind – but that is one hell of an understatement. These individuals on the Ninth Court need serious psychiatric treatment. We (the sane portion of the US) need to be put out of the misery these cuckoo-clocks consistently cause.

    10. For me, I was astounded to learn that the majority of senior judges on the 9th were appointed by Carter or Clinton. So it is no wonder to me that liberals love the 9th, and why the majority of their decisions get overturned.

    11. All companies should send Kalifornia nothing. I would send nothing to them cars trucks guns nothing.Let them build or make what they want. The shit they require for auto run the price up for everyone.That shit is not right.Same thing for gun manufacturers,they need to quit selling any kind of weapons to the. There might be some people upset,but so be it.There our more upset with the bull shit that come out of kalifornia.

    12. If anyone ever had any question that California was ‘the land of fruits and nuts’, here’s PROOF!

    13. If dual micro stamping is impossible then ALL the ammo the police use is illegal. What will Caifu**edup arm the police with, bow &arrows????

        1. And every – EVERY! – firearms and ammunition manufacturer that continues to sell product to ANY California government agency is complicit with California’s anti-Second Amendment stance.

          1. @Alan, that is why every We need the right of recall, and term limits, in every state and the federal system that applies to every legislator, every judge, and most bureaucrats.

        1. OF COURSE law enforcement is exempted. It would become required that ALL bullets be traced – showing up a lot of poor shooting by certain LEOs who manage to hit civilians while shooting at bad guys, and probably also expose a few cold-blooded killers in the ranks too. Microstamping would be worse for cops than body cams, and a huge boost to civilian lawsuits against the police. If it’s such a good idea then why are there ANY exemptions at all? Oh yeah – so some people can still kill without being caught.

      1. None of the CA “handgun list” laws apply to Law Enforcement. Tyrannical governments always exempt themselves from limiting their power.

    Leave a Comment 23 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *