Lawsuit against CA's waiting period laws...

[Quiet]

Back in 12-23-2011, the Calguns Foundation (CGF) filed a lawsuit (Silvester v. Harris) challenging CA's 10 day waiting period.

Today (12-09-2013), Senior Federal District Judge Anthony Ishii dismissed CA Attorney General Kamala Harris’ Motion to Dismiss the lawsuit.

The waiting period law (WPL) as applied against those who have previously purchased firearms or who possess certain state licenses is the equivalent of a prior restraint, and thus should be analyzed under strict scrutiny. However, under either strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny, the [10-day waiting period] fails. In terms of strict scrutiny, Harris has not shown that the law is effective either in reducing gun violence or in keeping firearms out of the hands of unqualified purchasers where the government has already issued that purchaser a License To Carry or a Certificate Of Eligibility.

In terms of intermediate scrutiny, neither of the bases argued by Harris is sufficient. There is no indication that the WPL is necessary to weed out unqualified purchasers. While it is appropriate to have a background check, the current systems and data available do not make the 10-day waiting period reasonable. In terms of cooling-off, there is no evidence to support the efficacy of the law in preventing impulsive firearm violence. Moreover, for those who already legally possess firearms, the WPL would have no effect in terms of creating a “cooling off” period. Any spontaneous desire to perform a violent act can be manifested through the weapon that is already in the individual’s possession. Because the WPL fails intermediate and strict scrutiny, Harris’s motion must be denied.

This is the first battle in the war against CA's waiting period law and it's a win.

This lawsuit may lead to a ruling in which non-prohibited persons that have a CA License to Carry permit or a CA DOJ BOF Certificate of Eligibility or a CA DOJ BOF Dangerous Weapons Permit to be exempt from the waiting period.

Best case scenario, it may also lead to a ruling that waiting periods are unconstitutional and the waiting period laws are voided/stuck down.

Keep in mind this is just the first battle in a long war.

 

[splithoof]

That is indeed some good news. However, even if ordered by a court, I am inclined to think that AG Harris will simply choose not to comply, forcing more suits, and waiting until something like that goes to SCOTUS on appeal. Can you even comprehend what a cold slap that would be to the party in charge? Lord help them if we ever see honest change for the better in CCW issuance; they will go kicking and screaming all the way to the absolute very end of the earth. Let's just hope it actually works out in our favor.

 

[DavidMS]

She will fight it but not risk contept of court

Contempt of court generally annoys the judge and he or she is likely to start throwing people in Jail and imposing large fines.

She will fight it as hard and as long as she can and then accept the loss.

 

[Ryanxia]

Let's keep our fingers crossed.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I read a detailed assessment on another site. Basically the court said that whether the trial court eventually applied strict or intermediate scrutiny, the state's case is not so clear that a summary dismissal would be appropriate.

The courts have yet to determine the level of scrutiny to apply to this right but it is well established as an individual right and an incorporated right under Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.

Mike

 

[9mmepiphany]

Bear in mind that this was only a denial for Summary Dismissal of the case. This means that the case now proceeds to trial.

This case is from 2011, we have a long way to go yet. What is slightly interesting is that as time passes, more and more counties are becoming CCW friendly

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Bear in mind that this was only a denial for Summary Dismissal of the case. This means that the case now proceeds to trial.

This case is from 2011, we have a long way to go yet. What is slightly interesting is that as time passes, more and more counties are becoming CCW friendly

Aaaaand...THIS is how we make inroads with respect to our RKBA.

As much as we detest states which enact draconian gun control measures, it's these cases which, carefully vetted, yank a knot in the scrotes of the gun control crowd. And it's been doing a good job for several decades, since the 70's.

As for the comment earlier about the DA simply choosing not to comply...perhaps, within some very tight limitations. I'm not an attorney, but I've had occasion to see what happens when a judge is ticked off by contempt. Things rapidly go downhill for those in contempt.