California appeals court upholds ban on high-capacity magazines

In a significant decision, a California appeals court ruled that the state's law banning gun magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds remains constitutional. This ruling, passed down in early March 2025 by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a narrow 7-4 vote, is controversial as it positions large-capacity magazines not as arms or essential firearm accessories under the Second Amendment. The majority opinion suggests that regulating such magazines aligns with historical practices aimed at ensuring public safety by limiting dangerous uses of firearms. The law’s upholding follows ongoing legal challenges primarily brought about by the California Rifle & Pistol Association and several individuals who argue that the law infringes on their Second Amendment rights. The contentious ruling has drawn additional attention due to Judge Lawrence VanDyke's unusual dissent in which he released a video demonstrating firearms and high-capacity magazine use, asserting that his colleagues misunderstood firearm mechanics. His dissent was met with criticism, particularly from Judge Marsha Berzon, who accused him of stepping out of bounds by presenting himself as an expert witness without adhering to the legal standards usually required. Despite the dissent, California Attorney General Rob Bonta hailed the ruling as a necessary regulation that could help mitigate mass shootings by controlling the number of rounds a shooter can fire before needing to reload. This ruling highlights the ongoing tension in the United States between gun rights advocates who prioritize individual rights under the Second Amendment and those who believe that regulation is essential for public safety, particularly in light of rising incidents of mass shootings across the nation. As legal battles continue, this decision reaffirms California's stance on gun control and may influence future legislative measures aimed at further regulating gun ownership and usage.