Case Law

The Legislative History of California’s Current 10-Day Waiting Period on the Delivery of Firearms

The Legislative History of California’s Current 10-Day Waiting Period on the Delivery of Firearms

Currently, California has a 10-day waiting period on the delivery of firearms to the purchaser (Pen. Code §§ 26815(a) & 27540(a)). This applies to private party transfers through licensed dealers (Pen. Code § 27545), imposing the same delay. A review of the legislative history reveals that this 10-day waiting period is neither long-standing nor consistent in application. The legislature’s primary intent was to provide law enforcement time for background checks, driven by manual processes. The “cooling-off” intent to deter impulsive violence emerged only in the 1990s, falsely retroactively attributed via People v. Bickston (1979). With modern instant-check systems, these rationales are outdated.

20 Aug, 2025
The Ninth Circuit’s Second Amendment Resistance: From Silveira to Duncan’s Procedural Maneuvers

The Ninth Circuit’s Second Amendment Resistance: From Silveira to Duncan’s Procedural Maneuvers

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has a well-documented history of resistance to the Second Amendment’s individual rights framework, a pattern that began with Silveira v. Lockyer (2002) and persists despite Supreme Court interventions in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022). This resistance…read more →

11 Aug, 2025
Ninth Circuit Ruling: Background Checks for Ammo Unconstitutional

Ninth Circuit Ruling: Background Checks for Ammo Unconstitutional

Case Overview Rhode v. Bonta is a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of California’s ammunition sales restrictions, specifically the background check requirements established under Proposition 63 (2016) and subsequent legislative amendments. The plaintiffs, including Olympic gold medalist shooter Kim Rhode, the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA), and several ammunition vendors, argued that these laws violated the Second Amendment, the…read more →

24 Jul, 2025
Supreme Court Passes on Maryland AR-15 Ban: What It Means for California Gun Owners

Supreme Court Passes on Maryland AR-15 Ban: What It Means for California Gun Owners

By The Davis Law Firm, www.calgunlawyers.com On a quiet June morning in 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court sent ripples through the firearms community by declining to hear Snope v. Brown, a case challenging Maryland’s ban on AR-15 rifles. For California gun owners, who face some of the nation’s strictest firearms laws, this decision—or lack thereof—carries weight. At The Davis Law…read more →

12 Jun, 2025

Restoring Firearm Rights in California: The Impact of Linton v. Bonta and AB 1078

By Jason Davis, The Davis Law Firm, www.calgunlawyers.com California’s stringent firearm laws have long posed challenges for individuals seeking to exercise their Second Amendment rights, particularly those with prior convictions. The California Department of Justice (DOJ) has historically enforced lifetime firearm bans for individuals with felony or domestic violence convictions, often ignoring out-of-state relief such as expungements or pardons. However,…read more →

12 May, 2025

Analysis and Rebuttal: Washington Supreme Court Opinion in State v. Gator’s Custom Guns, Inc.

Overview of the Opinion The Washington Supreme Court’s opinion in State v. Gator’s Custom Guns, Inc. (No. 102940-3, decided May 8, 2025) upholds the constitutionality of ESSB 5078, a Washington law banning the manufacture, import, distribution, or sale of large capacity magazines (LCMs), defined as ammunition feeding devices capable of holding more than 10 rounds. The majority reverses a superior…read more →

10 May, 2025

Why Snopes v. Brown Matters to Californians

On August 21, 2024, a petition for certiorari was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Snope v. Brown (No. 24-203), challenging the Fourth Circuit’s en banc decision in Bianchi v. Brown, 111 F.4th 438 (4th Cir. 2024), which upheld Maryland’s assault weapons ban. This case emerges in the wake of Duncan v. Bonta (9th Cir. 2025), where the Ninth…read more →

23 Apr, 2025

Flawed Foundations: How Duncan v. Bonta Undermines Bruen and Second Amendment Protections

In Duncan v. Bonta (2025), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, upheld California’s ban on large-capacity magazines (LCMs), reversing a district court’s ruling that the law violated the Second Amendment. The case, brought by plaintiffs including Virginia Duncan and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, challenged California Penal Code § 32310(c), which prohibits possession of magazines holding…read more →

18 Apr, 2025
12