Kris Brown, president of the gun-control nonprofit Brady, said the U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to back Benitez’s rulings if either case reaches the high court.
“I cannot imagine the court rubber-stamping those opinions — they’re lacking in logic,” Brown said. Pointing to Benitez’s ruling in the assault-weapons ban case, in which the judge compared AR-15s to “Swiss Army knives,” Brown said such thinking is “crazy town.”
Eric Ruben, an assistant professor at SMU Dedman School of Law in Dallas and a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, said the ruling [overturning the ban on high capcity] magazines is particularly vulnerable to reversal because it didn’t properly spell out why the restriction is a “substantial burden” on the Second Amendment.
“It’s the first time a federal district court concluded that large-capacity magazine bans are unconstitutional,” Ruben said. “And six federal appeals courts have upheld the constitutionality of these restrictions.”
Erik Jaffee, a lawyer for Firearms Policy Coalition, one of the plaintiffs, said California’s lawmakers are the ones who lack logic. He said they pass illegal gun-control laws to score political points instead of focusing on preventing crime.
And plaintiffs’ attorney George M. Lee, who is involved in suits challenging both state laws, said law-abiding citizens shouldn’t be burdened by an arbitrary limit on bullets.
“There’s no evidence that bans on large-capacity magazines do anything to reduce crime or reduce the number of fatalities that are associated with a mass killing,” Lee said.
— Erik Larson in California Gun Laws Reviled by NRA Face Pivotal Test at Hearing
California Will Argue to Reinstate Its Ban on ‘High Capacity’ Magazines Before the 9th Circuit Today is written by Dan Zimmerman for www.thetruthaboutguns.com