Firearms Owners Against Crime
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a memorandum of points and authorities in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction or, alternatively, a motion for summary judgment in a case known as Renna v. Bonta, which challenges California’s novel ban on hundreds of handgun models under its “Unsafe Handgun Act” (UHA).
This ban applies to handguns commonly used for lawful purposes by millions of Americans across the U.S. The UHA maintains a “Roster” of handguns, which may be lawfully sold in California. Handguns deemed “unsafe” under the UHA’s various technical and other requirements are excluded from the Roster and, therefore, may NOT be sold in California.
SAF is joined by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, the Firearms Policy Coalition, PWGG, L.P., North County Shooting Center, Gunfighter Tactical LLC, San Diego Gun Owners PAC, and several private citizens. They are represented by attorneys Bradley A. Benbrook and Raymond M. DiGuiseppe.
“Ever since California adopted this Act and created its Roster,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “the number of approved handguns has gradually been shrinking. In 2007, the law required semi-auto pistols to have a loaded chamber indicator and magazine disconnect, rendering a pistol inoperable unless the magazine is inserted. In 2013, California added a ‘microstamping’ requirement that is not available on any commercially available pistol. So, no new pistols have been added to the Roster since 2013.
“In 2020,” he continued, “the law was changed to require the state Department of Justice to remove three ‘grandfathered’ handguns from the Roster for each new handgun added. The result has been a dramatic reduction in the number of approved handguns allowed in California.
We believe the UHA, through its Roster, is banning handguns in California that are in common use across the country, and therefore violates the Second Amendment.
This has resulted in harm to firearms dealers, individual citizens and firearms-related advocacy and public policy organizations, and it cannot be allowed to continue, especially in the wake of June’s Bruen ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“There is no founding era precedent for declaring some guns ‘unsafe’ and banning their sale in California when they are in common use across the country,” Gottlieb said. “We’re asking the court to consolidate a preliminary injunction hearing with the trial on the merits scheduled in February, and issue an order declaring this handgun ban scheme unconstitutional and issue a restraining order against its further enforcement. Alternatively, we are asking the court to enter a summary judgment in our favor.”