Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
SAN FRANCISCO, CA (September 2, 2022) – Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) announced the filing of a petition for writ regarding the one-way fee- and cost-shifting provision in SB-1327, which California enacted as retribution for Texas’s SB 8 abortion law. The petition was filed in Jones v. Bonta, the groups’ Second Amendment lawsuit challenging California’s age-based ban on firearms purchases by law-abiding adults under the age of 21. The petition can be viewed at FPCLegal.org.
“In Section 2 of the recently enacted Senate Bill 1327 (“S.B. 1327,” 2021–2022 Reg. Sess.), California has enacted a one-way fee- and cost-shifting provision that can be understood in no way other than as an attempt to chill Second Amendment lawsuits and punish the plaintiffs and attorneys who are not deterred by Section 2’s threat of ruinous monetary liability,” the Petition states. “Unless this Court (or, failing this Court, the Supreme Court) promptly exercises its authority under the All Writs Act to enjoin Defendants from enforcing Section 2 against Plaintiffs in relation to this action, Section 2 will deprive the federal courts of jurisdiction over this action.”
“While the matter is not free from doubt, it is reasonable to expect that the law may be interpreted to apply to fees incurred after that date in suits that have already been filed,” argues the Petition. “Due to this risk, and barring unforeseen circumstances (such as a binding commitment from Defendants not to enforce Section 2 in relation to pending suits), Plaintiffs plan to seek to dismiss this appeal and this suit entirely if, by January 1, 2023, they have not obtained an injunction foreclosing Defendants from seeking to obtain fees and costs under Section 2 on the basis of this lawsuit.”
“The unilateral fee-shifting provision of SB-1327 is California’s latest attempt to chill not only the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment,” said FPC Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack, “but also their willingness to run roughshod over numerous additional constitutional rights in that pursuit. The injunction sought in this Petition is essential to the ongoing battle to restore the rights of peaceable Californians.”