Top Washington state court upholds ban on high-capacity gun magazines
The Washington State Supreme Court upheld the state's ban on high-capacity magazine guns in a Thursday ruling, overturning a lower court order that labeled it unconstitutional.
The 7-2 decision affirmed the constitutionality of a three-year old state law that prevents the sale, manufacture and import of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds
'This regulation does not limit the number of bullets or magazines that may be purchased or possessed. By restricting only magazines of a capacity greater than 10, the statute effectively regulates the maximum capacity of magazines, leaving the weapon fully functional for its intended purpose,' Justice Charles Johnson wrote in the majority's opinion about the ban.
'Thus, we are not convinced that the restriction here renders the right to bear arms in self defense meaningless,' he continued.
Gator's Custom Guns Inc., a Washington for-profit corporation and Walter Wentz initiated the lawsuit against the state law, arguing that the ban violated citizens' Second Amendment rights.
Justices Sheryl Gordon McCloud and G. Helen Whitener dissented on Thursday in defense of the plaintiffs' dispute, alleging a magazine is not an optional accessory for a repeating firearm.
'It is a defining characteristic of a repeating firearm. As Gator's Custom Guns explains, 'Without a magazine inserted, a semiautomatic weapon will not function properly' and is 'essentially a single shot breech loader' like an old-fashioned musket,' Justice McCloud wrote in the dissent.
'And because the magazine functions as an ammunition feeding device, it is not just a passive receptacle for storing ammunition like a cartridge box.'
McCloud, in the dissent, added that the Second Amendment does not just protect 'arms' but also 'arms-bearing conduct.'
Washington Attorney General Nick Brown lauded the court's decision on Thursday, citing the threat of violent events.
'Today's decision is right on the law and will save lives,' Brown said in a prepared statement according to the Seattle Times. 'Large capacity magazines are used in the overwhelming majority of mass shootings, and reducing the toll of these senseless killings is vitally important.'
Thirteen other states currently outlaw high capacity magazines.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Colorado joins lawsuit against ATF over deal ending ban on rapid-fire triggers for rifles
DENVER (KDVR) — Colorado is one of 16 states that have sued the Trump administration over its plan to allow the sale of forced-reset triggers that make semiautomatic rifles fire more rapidly and return devices already seized to their owners. The suit announced Monday argues that returning the triggers would violate federal law, pose a threat to residents and law enforcement and worsen gun violence. It was filed in federal court in Maryland. Governor signs bill requiring training for semiautomatic guns, banning rapid-fire conversion devices 'It's hard enough for our local law enforcement officials to protect Colorado communities from gun violence without the federal government willfully ignoring the law,' said Attorney General Weiser. 'The law is clear: machine guns, and devices that turn a semiautomatic weapon into a machine gun, are illegal. We're suing to stop the ATF and the administration from making our communities more dangerous by distributing thousands of devices that turn firearms into weapons of war. These weapons have no place in our communities, and I will continue to fight to keep Coloradans safe from gun violence.' The Colorado law banning the sale of rapid-fire conversion devices, including forced-reset triggers, was signed into law in April and will go into effect on Aug. 1, 2026. Second Amendment supporters have called on the U.S. Attorney General to investigate the measure as an infringement on the U.S. Constitution. Weiser said in a release announcing the state's participation in the lawsuit that machine gun conversion devices like the forced-reset triggers are frequently used in violent crimes and mass shootings. The state attorney general said that by using these devices, firearms can exceed the rate of fire of many military machine guns. 'ATF has noted a significant rise in the use of these types of devices, leading to incidents of machine-gun fire increasing by 1,400% from 2019 through 2021,' Weiser said in a press release. There had been several legal battles over the devices, which replace the typical trigger on an AR-15-style rifle. The Biden administration had previously argued the triggers qualify as machine guns under federal law because constant finger pressure on the triggers will keep a rifle firing, essentially creating an illegal machine gun. The ATF previously classified the triggers as machine guns, but under a directive from the Trump Administration, the bureau signed the settlement agreement that promises to stop enforcing federal law against the devices. New requirements begin July 1 for Colorado concealed carry permits Rare Breed Triggers, the maker of the devices, had argued that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was wrong in its classification and ignored demands to stop selling the triggers before being sued by the Biden administration. The Justice Department reached a deal announced last month with Rare Breed Triggers to allow the sale of forced-reset triggers. The company was previously represented by David Warrington, Trump's current White House counsel. Under the settlement, Rare Breed Triggers agreed not to develop such devices to be used on handguns, according to the Justice Department. The settlement requires the ATF to return triggers that it had seized or that owners had voluntarily surrendered to the government. The states' lawsuit is being led by the attorneys general of Delaware, Maryland and New Jersey. Other states involved are Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, along with the District of Columbia. The attorneys general in those states are all Democrats, though the office in Hawaii is technically nonpartisan. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Miami Herald
7 hours ago
- Miami Herald
PRESS RELEASE: LIE to YOUR BANK and LOSE YOUR GUNS RIGHTS, Says US COURT of APPEALS. (Opinion Attached)
Zherka: 'My Banks Got Paid, My Rights Got Taken' - Government Overreach Mirrors Trump's Political Witch Hunt Real estate titan vows Supreme Court appeal after court upholds lifetime gun ban for nonviolent conviction: 'This is lawfare, plain and simple.' NEW YORK, NY / ACCESS Newswire / June 9, 2025 / On June 9, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that real estate magnate and political commentator Selim "Sam" Zherka can be permanently stripped of his Second Amendment rights-even though his conviction was for a nonviolent financial offense, for lying to his bank yet his banks were paid in full, and no one lost a dime. The ruling, in Zherka v. Bondi, upheld the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), a statute that prohibits felons from possessing firearms if the firearm has ever moved in or affected interstate commerce. Zherka, who has no history of violence, challenged the law as unconstitutional "as applied" to him. "I filed an as-applied challenge to the constitutionality of § 922(g), which prohibits felons from possessing any firearm that has moved in or affects interstate commerce," Zherka said. "There are currently conflicting opinions among the federal circuits, which makes my case ripe for a Supreme Court challenge." Zherka drew a direct comparison between his case and that of President Donald J. Trump. "I built a major real estate business like Trump. I was outspoken against both parties. I ran a newspaper that exposed corrupt politicians-and they came after me just like they're going after him. My banks all got paid and love me. But this didn't matter. It's the same political witch hunt." "This decision poses a threat to every American," he warned. "It allows the government to strip away your constitutional rights based on a technicality-without any violence, without any harm, without any loss. Every American who has ever filled out a credit application should be very concerned. Even if you pay your bills, beware." "This decision opens the door to the government's ability to strip any American of their rights-not for violence or harm-but simply for allegedly lying. That is not what our forefathers intended. That is not freedom." The Second Circuit acknowledged that Zherka is part of "the people" protected by the Second Amendment, but ruled that Congress may disarm him anyway based on the fact of a felony conviction-regardless of context or threat. "I respect the Judges but strongly disagree with their decision," Zherka said. "I'm taking this to the Supreme Court. And God willing, a victory there will not only restore my rights-it will set a precedent that protects President Trump and every other American from being railroaded." The case comes amid national debate over political prosecutions, government overreach, and whether nonviolent financial offenders can be stripped of fundamental rights-without due process and without individualized review. (Opinion of the US Court of Appeals 2nd Circuit attached ) Contact Information Sam Zherka samzherka@ SOURCE: Concrete Ventures LLC press release
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court Victory: U.S. Blocks Mexico's Gun Industry Lawsuit
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Mexico's lawsuit against American firearms manufacturers, siding with a multistate coalition led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. The decision marks a significant victory for gun rights advocates and American manufacturers facing international legal challenges. Mexico had sued Smith & Wesson and Interstate Arms, claiming the companies bore responsibility for weapons used by drug cartels. The lawsuit sought to hold American manufacturers liable for criminal activities south of the border. 'Mexico cannot blame American firearms companies for its ongoing internal war against the cartels, and in no way can a foreign nation be allowed to undermine our Second Amendment rights,' Paxton said. 'I proudly supported our firearms manufacturers against Mexico's baseless assault on our liberties and am pleased the Supreme Court unanimously sided with common sense, the rule of law, and America.' The attorneys general coalition argued that Mexico has numerous options to address its gun violence problems. These include reporting dealers allegedly selling to cartels, seeking extradition of gun traffickers, or strengthening border controls. 'But it cannot end the domestic manufacturing of American firearms. Nor can it impose its policy preferences on the United States by judicial fiat,' the brief stated.
