Spin Control: State Supreme Court wrestles with ban on large-capacity magazines

Gun Rights

With celebrations marking the start of a new Legislature with a new governor capturing most of the attention around the Capitol last week, advocates of gun rights and gun safety measures were probably more focused on something else.

Across the flag circle from the domed Legislative Building, the Washington Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday on a case that could decide the fate of the state’s 2022 law banning the sale of large-capacity magazines.

Wrestling with questions of the state and federal constitutions, the justices grilled attorneys from both sides on the essential elements of a firearm and when an element can be considered so dangerous it can be banned by the state.

The state currently limits magazines for semiautomatic firearms to no more than 10 rounds. After the ban went into effect in July 2022, a Kelso, Washington, gun dealer continued to sell them, prompting the state to file a consumer protection lawsuit against him.

You Might Like

A trial court ruled the ban was unconstitutional, and the state appealed. Siding with Gators Custom Guns, Inc., by way of friend of the court briefs, are the National Rifle Association, the Second Amendment Foundation and Gun Owners of America. Other briefs siding with the state came from the NAACP, the Alliance for Gun Responsibility and the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

So, the usual suspects.

Cases involving gun laws are always tricky in Washington, which has a state constitutional amendment that is somewhat different, and in some respects broader than the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. The two aren’t in “lockstep,” as state Chief Justice Debra Stephens, noted.

“We independently interpret individual rights in Washington,” Stephens said.

The justices seemed to be picking their way through dangerous territory, such as what constitutes a firearm. It would include essential parts of a firearm: a trigger, for example, is essential because a gun can’t fire without one; a silencer, however, would not be considered essential.

Austin Hatcher, attorney for Gator’s Custom Guns, argued that for a semiautomatic firearm, a magazine is the former because it can’t fire without one: “It is a component.”

Justice Steven González asked Hatcher whether a large capacity magazine is the same as a bump stock, which can be added to a semiautomatic rifle to make it fire more rapidly. The state bans bump-stocks.

Hatcher said he hadn’t studied bump stocks, but believed they are “essentially different” from large-capacity magazines.

Noah Purcell, arguing for the state, contended that a magazine of some type is necessary for semiautomatic firearms, but “there is no firearm that requires a large capacity to operate.”

Could the state ban magazines that held more than two rounds, Justice Sheryl Gordon McCloud asked.

No, Purcell replied, because another constitutional test is whether something is commonly used for self-defense, and in most cases a person defending themselves only fires one or two rounds. But cases where a person defending themselves or their property needs more than 10 rounds are rare, he said, so they shouldn’t be considered common use for self-defense.

But they are in common use, Hatcher said, because there tens of millions – perhaps even hundreds of millions – such magazines in the possession of gun owners around the country.

Those purchased before July 2022 aren’t banned under the law, although there are restrictions on a gun owner selling or trading a large-capacity magazine purchased before the ban took effect.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that constitutional regulations on firearms must have some tie to a standard that could be traced back to the time of the Founding Fathers. Purcell argued that in a time when most firearms had to be reloaded after firing a round, the Founding Fathers couldn’t have envisioned the technology that would allow for large-capacity magazines.

A strict interpretation of that requirement would mean that if someone developed a laser gun, the state or the federal government couldn’t regulate it because the Founding Fathers had no such restriction, Purcell said.

Typically the court takes weeks or even months to decide a case. While the justices are deliberating, the Legislature is likely to consider a new round of gun -control measures.

A House committee has a hearing set next week for bills that would require a state patrol-issued permit to buy a firearm, require locked storage of firearms when they are in a vehicle or a home, and limits to the number of firearms and rounds of ammunition a dealer can sell to a customer in a month.

You Might Like

Articles You May Like

Great American Outdoor Show, the ‘world’s largest,’ returns Saturday in Pennsylvania
New Guns And Gear February 2025
Wiley X Ballistic Rated Eyewear – Stylish Safety
After ‘intense’ push, Kennedy’s main Republican holdout got to a ‘yes’. It’s a repeated pattern with Trump nominees.
Why The 1911 Will Never Die

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *