Hit Factor
Well-known member
- Messages
- 972
The tide is definitely turning on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Another 3-judge panel just reaffirmed the appellate court’s previous injunction against enforcing AB 2571, which attempted, among other things, to “prohibit a firearm industry member, as defined, from advertising or marketing any firearm-related product, as defined, in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors.” This time, the 9th Circuit panel made clear in no uncertain terms that the injunction against enforcement applied to the law in its entirety, stating:
“We earlier held that Section 22949.80 of the California Business and Professions Code—a statutory scheme that bars firearm advertising that “reasonably appears to be attractive” to minors—violates the First Amendment. On remand, the district court declined to preliminarily enjoin subsection (b) of Section 22949.80, which prevents the firearm industry from compiling or using personal information of minors for marketing purposes. We reverse the district court and clarify that our constitutional analysis applied to the entirety of Section 22949.80.” (emphasis added)
Read the ruling here: https://crpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/2025-07-07-Memorandum-Disposition2329686.1.pdf
“We earlier held that Section 22949.80 of the California Business and Professions Code—a statutory scheme that bars firearm advertising that “reasonably appears to be attractive” to minors—violates the First Amendment. On remand, the district court declined to preliminarily enjoin subsection (b) of Section 22949.80, which prevents the firearm industry from compiling or using personal information of minors for marketing purposes. We reverse the district court and clarify that our constitutional analysis applied to the entirety of Section 22949.80.” (emphasis added)
Read the ruling here: https://crpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/2025-07-07-Memorandum-Disposition2329686.1.pdf
