Posted on 09/22/2023 5:48:42 AM PDT by marktwain
On September 13, 2023, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held California AB2571, which broadly limits the commercial speech of people promoting the sale of firearms or firearms products or events where firearms products are used or sold, was probably unconstitutional. For example, this would include virtually all gun shows. The three-judge panel stopped enforcement of the bill. The California Government had passed the bill into law a bit more than a year earlier.
On June 30, 2022, the California Governor signed AB 2571 into law, a sweeping new restriction on the commercial speech of firearms industry members. The bill sought to prevent advertising any firearm-related product that “reasonably appears to be attractive to minors.” In effect, the legislation would shut down most advertising for firearms or related products such as accessories, ammunition, reloading components, or, likely, shooting sports, hunting, or self-defense. The Bruen decision restoring the right to carry arms in public places had been published on June 22, only eight days before the bill passed.
A lawsuit had quickly been filed against the enforcement of the bill. The District Court ruled in favor of the government. An appeal was filed to the Ninth Circuit.
The panel reversed the district court’s denial of plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin, pursuant to the First and Fourteenth Amendments, a California law that prohibits the advertising of any “firearm-related product in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors.” California Business and Professions Code §22949.80.
The panel assumed that California’s law regulates only commercial speech and that intermediate scrutiny applies.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
If firearms advertising is produced so that it does not “reasonably appear to be attractive to minors” then how will it appear to adults?
Ammoland.com has some great advertisements for firearms and ammo. Would this law affect them since the website can be viewed by people in California?
It’s time for SCOTUS to smack these States down and smack them down hard. This is no different than what the southern states did to keep blacks from exercising their right to vote in the 50’s and 60’s.
L
Reminds me of all the times Trump would lose in the lower courts and win in the higher courts. There are a lot of flakes on the bench in lower courts.
bkmk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.