Federal court strikes down California ammo background checks, sparking gun safety debate
While some say this is a step back for gun safety, others believe this is part of common-sense gun laws.
The 2015 mass shooting at a San Bernardino County office killed 16 people, including both shooters who carried out the attack. The next year, California voters supported Proposition 63, which required background checks for those buying ammunition.
"To me, it's peculiar," said John Donohue, a Stanford Law Professor. "It really is a peculiar feature that these two federal judges are striking down the will of the people as well as the will of the California legislature."
Professor Donohue feels the law made sense since roughly 400,000 guns were stolen last year.
"Guns are stolen all the time because gun owners leave them in unlocked cars very often," he said. "So, if you can at least pose a restraint when the bad guy goes to get the ammunition, you're screening out people who the law says should not be having access to firearms."
Gun owner Bradley Stolfi from Cloverdale disagrees. He says he supports common-sense gun laws. He shared his thoughts with us when background checks on ammunition were first signed into law.
"I think every firearm should require a background check, and it should be thorough," Stolfi said.
Stolfi equates a background check for a firearm to getting a driver's license. He says once people pass that process, drivers are no longer required to get background checks every time they fuel up. He does, though, advocate for stricter training to become a gun owner since guns and ammunition have evolved since the 2nd Amendment was drafted more than 230 years ago.
"I don't see any need for any magazine to be able to hold more than 10," he said. "That's going to get me in a lot of trouble with guys I know, but that's what I think."
While the 9th Circuit Court's decision will most likely be appealed, Professor Donohue wonders about the broader impact the decision will have on gun ownership. He says this might give gun lobbyists ammunition to attack background checks for firearm purchases.
"Certainly, there has been an effort that has gotten support from the US Supreme Court to be very, very aggressive in implementing the Second Amendment in these types of challenges," said Professor Donohue. "Many things that I thought would not have been struck down have in fact been struck down."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court keeps in place restrictions on immigration stops in L.A. based on language, job
LOS ANGELES — An appeals court on Friday kept in place a Los Angeles federal judge's ruling that bars immigration agents from using a person's spoken language or job, like day laborer, as the sole pretext to detain them. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in its ruling said that there seemed to be one issue with U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong's temporary restraining order, but it did not put it on hold as the government sought. The appeals court said that a part of the July 11 temporary restraining order referring to "except as permitted by law" was too vague. "Defendants, however, are not likely to succeed on their remaining arguments," the court ruled, referring to the U.S. government. Frimpong, a judge at the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in Los Angeles, issued the temporary restraining order after a lawsuit was filed by people who claimed they were detained by immigration officers without good reason. Three people were waiting at a bus stop for jobs when they were detained by immigration officials, and two others are U.S. citizens who claim they were stopped and aggressively questioned despite telling agents they were citizens. Other organizations, including the United Farm Workers, also sued. Frimpong wrote in the temporary restraining order ruling that the people suing were 'likely to succeed in proving that the federal government is indeed conducting roving patrols without reasonable suspicion and denying access to lawyers.' The July 11 restraining order bars the detention of people unless the officer or agent 'has reasonable suspicion that the person to be stopped is within the United States in violation of U.S. immigration law.' It says they may not base that suspicion solely on a person's apparent race or ethnicity; the fact that they're speaking Spanish or English with an accent; their presence at a particular location like a bus stop or a day laborer pickup site; or the type of work one does. Los Angeles has been targeted by the Trump administration for immigration raids that the city's mayor has decried as a campaign to terrorize residents. The lawsuit that led to the temporary restraining order was filed against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others. Kyle Harvick, the deputy incident commander for the government's immigration action in Los Angeles, said that "certain types of businesses, including carwashes" were chosen by immigration agents "because past experiences have demonstrated that illegal aliens utilize and seek work at these locations," according to the appeals court ruling. The appeals court found that "the four enumerated factors at issue — apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent, particular location, and type of work, even when considered together — describe only a broad profile and 'do not demonstrate reasonable suspicion for any particular stop.'" The appeals court panel said that the government did not dispute constitutional issues when trying to get the temporary restraining order stayed. 'They did not meaningfully dispute the district court's conclusion that sole reliance on the four enumerated factors, alone or in combination, does not satisfy the constitutional requirement of reasonable suspicion,' the appeals court panel wrote. Mark Rosenbaum, senior special counsel for strategic litigation at Public Counsel, which is among the groups representing the people who sued, said Friday that the actions by immigration agents in the Los Angeles operation were unconstitutional. "Today's ruling sends a powerful message: the government cannot excuse illegal conduct by relying on racial profiling as a tool of immigration enforcement," Rosenbaum said. "These raids were unconstitutional, unsupported by evidence, and rooted in fear and harmful stereotypes, not public safety." The appeals court did find that part of Frimpong's temporary order was vague, relating to "except as permitted by law" in the clause about detaining people based on the four factors of race, speaking Spanish, a location or type of work. But it otherwise denied the government's motion for a stay. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat, called the appeals court ruling a victory. "Today is a victory for the rule of law and for the City of Los Angeles," she said in a statement. "The Temporary Restraining Order that has been protecting our communities from immigration agents using racial profiling and other illegal tactics when conducting their cruel and aggressive enforcement raids and sweeps will remain in place for now." The immigration raids launched in Los Angeles in June resulted in large protests in the city, some of which turned violent. The Trump administration sent National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles in a move that was condemned by Bass, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and others. The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Friday about the appeals court ruling. This article was originally published on Solve the daily Crossword
Boston Globe
3 days ago
- Boston Globe
Jeffrey Epstein's former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, is moved to minimum-security women's prison in Texas
Advertisement Minimum-security federal prison camps house inmates the Bureau of Prisons considers to be the lowest security risk. Some don't even have fences. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The prison camps were originally designed with low security to make operations easier and to allow inmates tasked with performing work at the prison, like landscaping and maintenance, to avoid repeatedly checking in and out of a main prison facility. Prosecutors have said Epstein's sex crimes could not have been done without Maxwell, but her lawyers have maintained that she was wrongly prosecuted and denied a fair trial, and have floated the idea of a pardon from President Trump. They have also asked the US Supreme Court to take up her case. Maxwell's case has been the subject of heightened public focus since an outcry over the Justice Department's statement last month saying that it would not be releasing any additional documents from the Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The decision infuriated online sleuths, conspiracy theorists, and elements of Trump's base who had hoped to see proof of a government coverup. Advertisement Since then, administration officials have tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case, including by requesting from courts the unsealing of grand jury transcripts. Maxwell, meanwhile, was interviewed at a Florida courthouse over two days last week by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and the House Oversight Committee had also said that it wanted to speak with Maxwell. Her lawyers said this week that they would be open to an interview, but only if the panel were to ensure immunity from prosecution. In a letter Friday to Maxwell's lawyers, US Representative James Comer, the committee chair, wrote that the committee was willing to delay the deposition until after the resolution of Maxwell's appeal to the Supreme Court. That appeal is expected to be resolved in late September. Comer wrote that while Maxwell's testimony was 'vital' to the Republican-led investigation into Epstein, the committee would not provide immunity or any questions in advance of her testimony, as was requested by her team. Two women who have accused Epstein and Maxwell of abusing them, Maria and Annie Farmer, and the family members of another, Virginia Giuffre, who died by suicide this spring, reacted angrily to the news of Maxwell's relocation. 'It is with horror and outrage that we object to the preferential treatment convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell has received,' they said in a statement Friday. 'Ghislaine Maxwell is a sexual predator who physically assaulted minor children on multiple occasions, and she should never be shown any leniency.' Advertisement 'President Trump has sent a clear message today: Pedophiles deserve preferential treatment and their victims do not matter,' the statement said.
Miami Herald
3 days ago
- Miami Herald
3-year-old in state care dies when worker forgets him in hot car, AL cops say
A 3-year-old in state custody died in a hot car when a worker forgot to drop him off at day care after a family visit, Alabama authorities said. Now, the Jefferson County District Attorney's Office has announced the arrest of 54-year-old Kela Stanford on a charge of leaving a child or an incapacitated person unattended in a motor vehicle. 'This is a terrible tragedy that was completely avoidable and unnecessary,' District Attorney Danny Carr said Aug. 1. Records show Stanford was booked in jail Aug. 1 and bonded out about an hour later. 'I truly believe in my heart, because I have met her several times and she has transferred kids a lot, I don't think she killed my nephew intentionally,' the boy's aunt, Brittney Debruce, told NBC. 'But she made a mistake. We definitely want answers, and we won't stop.' Stanford is accused of leaving 3-year-old Ketorrius 'KJ' Starkes Jr. in a hot car in Birmingham for about five hours on July 22, leading to his death, according to the Jefferson County coroner. Stanford was a contract worker with the Alabama Department of Human Resources, which had custody of the toddler at the time, the agency said. Stanford picked up KJ from day care and brought him to a supervised visit with his dad at a DHR office, then she was supposed to drop him back off at day care after, WBRC reported after speaking to the boy's father. But police say she forgot he was in her car and went home instead, according to the outlet. It wasn't until the boy's foster mother called looking for the child that they realized he had been in the car all along, reported. 'I mean, words can't even express how I feel right now,' the father told WBRC. 'As soon as I leave my son, the first thing he says is, 'Daddy, I want to go with you.' He says that every time, and it really hurts.' DHR told McClatchy News the woman was terminated. Now she's facing up to 20 years in prison if convicted. KJ's family is calling for change. 'We want justice for my nephew KJ and also for this to never happen to another kid again,' Debruce wrote on Facebook. 'IF the State is going to remove people's kids from their home and their families they should be held 100% accountable for their safety and well-being.' More than 1,000 children have died in hot cars since 1998, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 'About 37 children a year die from heatstroke, either because they were left or became trapped in a car. During the summer, that's about two children every week killed in a hot car.' Hot car deaths are most common in the summer, but they can happen at any time, according to the administration. The first 'vehicular heatstroke' of the year typically happens in March. 'Leaving a window open is not enough — temperatures inside the car can rise almost 20 degrees Fahrenheit within the first 10 minutes, even with a window cracked open,' the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said. If you see a child alone in a vehicle, officials said you should make sure the child is responsive and if not, immediately call 911.
