(UPDATE: 4/25/20 A preliminary injunction blocking the state from requiring background checks before purchasing ammunition won’t take effect despite the earlier ruling. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay late Friday evening. This means the law requiring background checks for ammunition buyers that has been in force is currently back in effect. The headline has been altered to reflect this change. Original story published below.)
A federal judge in California has ruled against a state law requiring background checks to buy ammunition, calling it "onerous and convoluted" and saying it runs afoul of Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
"The experiment has been tried. The casualties have been counted," San Diego District Judge Roger Benitez said in his lengthy decision. "California’s new ammunition background check law misfires and the Second Amendment rights of California citizens have been gravely injured."
The lawsuit against the rule was brought by California Rifle & Pistol Association, several out-of-state ammo companies including Able's Sporting, AMDEP Holdings, and R&S Firearms, and six-time Olympic medalist skeet shooter Kim Rhode, all of whom alleged the new rule violated people’s constitutional rights. The law, Proposition 63, was approved by voters in 2016.
And apparently, Judge Benitez agreed, saying that, "The background check experiment defies common sense while unduly and severely burdening the Second Amendment rights of every responsible, gun owning citizen desiring to lawfully buy ammunition." In his decision, the judge cited the many cases of citizens being wrongly rejected by background checks since the law went into affect seven months ago.
He also ruled that the law's ban on the sale of ammo from out-of-state violates federal interstate commerce laws.