You heard that right, the Ninth Circuit. Yeah, that circuit. The Ninth Circuit just declared it unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. This is one of the most important pro-gun rulings since Bruin, because this is, like I said, is one that many anti-gun states were starting to copy and institute. And this could have national ripple effects rather quickly. We’re breaking it all down, including what the ruling says, what it means for you, and how it fits into the ongoing war on our rights. Really quick, I want to thank today’s sponsor, the Snorin Desert Institute. SDI is a fantastic option if you’re interested in turning your passion for firearms into a career.

They offer accredited online gunsmithing and firearms technology programs, and even drone programs that you learn from the comfort of your own home. Whether you’re new to the industry or looking to sharpen your skills, SDI has the resources and training to help you get there. Learn more by heading over to sdi.edu slash gng. Link is in the description and the pinned comment. You can also use that QR code. Let’s get into this one. The case is well known. It’s Rodi v Bonta, and it’s been working its way through the court since 2018. And when I first looked at the decision yesterday, when I saw 2018, I was like, man, it doesn’t seem like it’s been that long, but it’s been a long time.

The lead plaintiff is somebody you may know. It’s Olympic shooter Kim Rodi, a U.S. Olympian, along with other gun owners, ammo retailers, and the California Rifle and Pistol Association. They’re challenging Proposition 63, which was California’s first of its kind ammunition background check regime, which went into effect in 2019. Here’s what the law did. It required every single ammunition purchase to go through a background check, whether you bought a single round, a box, or whatever. If you bought a box this morning and came back in the evening to buy another box, you had to go through another background check.

You had to pay a fee each time you purchased ammo. You couldn’t buy ammo online and have it shipped to your house. It had to be delivered face to face by a licensed California vendor. Buying ammo out of state? Nope. It had to be shipped to a licensed California dealer where you’d have to do that background check and possibly pay storage fees on top of it. It was the most aggressive ammunition regulation in the country, and it was aimed at making it expensive and painful to exercise your rights. Now, here’s the punchline. The Ninth Circuit ruled the entire regime violates the Second Amendment.

The Ninth Circuit! That’s how you know it’s really bad. They applied the Supreme Court’s Bruin Standard, which says that if a gun law burdens conduct protected by the Second Amendment, the government has to prove it’s consistent with this nation’s historical tradition on firearm regulation. Let’s walk through how the court analyzed this. First, the court said that ammo is obviously protected by the Second Amendment. Why? Because a firearm isn’t even operable without it. If you can’t buy ammo, your right to own a gun is meaningless. Period. Next, they looked at whether California’s background check law meaningfully constrained that right, and they said yes, it does.

Absolutely. And here’s what the court cited. Every ammunition transaction required government approval. The process involved delays, fees, and paperwork, and it applied to every single purchase, no matter how many you’ve done before. So the burden was ongoing, broad, and costly. So what did California say in its defense? Well, they claimed that this is just like the historical tradition of requiring loyalty oaths during the revolution, or banning disloyal people from owning guns, or even concealed carrier permits from the 1800s. But the court saw through that and rejected all of it. They said that those old laws were one-time checks often tied to being in the militia or holding office, and none of them required law-abiding citizens to get background checked every single time they bought ammunition.

California’s law was completely different in how and why it regulated, and that’s exactly what Bruin says to analyze. So the court did a good job here. Bottom line, there is no historical precedent for this kind of recurring background check system on ammunition. And because the law failed the Bruin test, the court did something rare. It upheld the district court’s permanent injunction. That means California is blocked from enforcing the ammunition background check law. The state can’t stop people from bringing ammo into the state from outside of California. And those face-to-face ammo transactions, they’re also struck down. It’s a total victory.

The Ninth Circuit, I’ll say it again, the Ninth Circuit said that this regime is facially unconstitutional. Now, keep in mind, California may still try to appeal us to the United States Supreme Court, but for now, the ruling stands. And as of last night, several retailers that I know that sell ammunition began shipping ammunition into California. Now, one judge did dissent, Judge J. Bybee, and he argued that the law only imposed a small fee and a minor delay, moron, and that it was similar to shall issue systems, which the Bruin court said were generally okay. But the majority shot that down, and they said this isn’t a shall issue system.

This is a shall pay and wait every time you buy a bullet system, and that’s the big difference here. So let’s talk about why this case is a huge deal. This is the first major appellate ruling striking down ammunition background checks under Bruin. It sets a powerful precedent for challenging similar laws in places like New York, New Jersey, or Illinois, or any other state that has it brewing within their system. It also is reinforcing that ammunition is protected by the Second Amendment, and pushing back against the idea that states can license or ration your rights by slow, costly red tape.

It’s also a reminder that state laws don’t get a pass just because they say it’s for safety. They still have to meet constitutional scrutiny. Folks, this is a major 2A victory, and it would not have happened without people standing up and fighting in the courts. Kim Rhodey, the CRPA, and every individual who said enough, they just helped tear down one of the most restrictive ammo laws in the country. Let’s make sure we keep the pressure on. Share this video to others who may be interested in ammunition and buying it freely without government intrusion. And subscribe to this channel if you’re not already.

I’ll bring you Second Amendment news every single day, even on my birthday. And smash that like button so that YouTube knows that patriots like you care about the Constitution. Until next time, stay safe, stay informed, and stay free. God bless America, and God bless y’all. Take care. Thank you. [tr:trw].

See more of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News on their Public Channel and the MPN Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News channel.