9th Circuit Strikes Down California Ammunition Background Check Law as Unconstitutional

A federal appeals court has ruled that a California law requiring background checks for ammunition purchases is unconstitutional, striking down a voter-approved measure aimed at curbing gun violence. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s 2024 decision, finding the law violates the Second Amendment by “meaningfully constrain[ing]” the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The law, enacted in 2019 after passage in 2016, mandated that individuals undergo a background check—costing $1 or $19 depending on eligibility—each time they purchased bullets. Judges emphasized that the Second Amendment includes the right to “operate” firearms, necessitating access to ammunition for self-defense [1].

The ruling aligns with broader legal challenges to California’s stringent gun laws. The state had argued the law closed a “dangerous loophole,” enabling law enforcement to track individuals who illegally possess firearms by flagging them during ammunition purchases. However, the court rejected this rationale, with Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta writing that the law imposed an undue burden on lawful gun owners. Critics, including the California Rifle & Pistol Association, described the law as “absurdly restrictive,” noting that out-of-state residents and owners of older firearms often faced barriers to purchasing bullets due to gaps in the state’s database [1].

The decision has drawn sharp criticism from California’s Democratic leadership. Governor Gavin Newsom called it a “slap in the face” to public safety efforts, while the California Department of Justice stated the ruling undermines a “lifesaving measure.” The state has signaled it will explore further legal options, though the law was already stayed pending appeals. The court’s decision also highlighted flaws in California’s automated background check system, which rejected 11% of applicants in the first half of 2023, according to a lower court ruling.

The ruling reflects a growing judicial skepticism of expansive gun control measures. This case follows recent decisions invalidating California laws banning high-capacity magazines and assault-style weapons. Legal experts note that the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent emphasis on historical gun regulations has emboldened challenges to modern laws lacking such precedent. The 9th Circuit’s decision may prompt similar debates in other states, where gun rights advocates increasingly target regulations on ammunition access.

John Parkin, a firearms industry representative, argued the law was poorly designed, stating it “made it difficult or impossible for some legal gun owners to purchase ammunition.” While the state framed the law as a tool to prevent illicit gun use, opponents argue it disproportionately affects responsible gun owners. The ruling underscores the ongoing tension between public safety initiatives and constitutional rights, with courts now playing a pivotal role in defining the boundaries of firearm regulation [1].

Source: [1] [Federal court rules California voter-passed law that requires background checks to buy bullets is unconstitutional] [https://fortune.com/2025/07/25/federal-court-california-law-background-checks-buy-bullets-unconstitutional/]