Miller v. Bonta

Defending California’s assault-weapon restriction.

Court: Ninth Circuit

Issue at Stake: Assault weapons

Summary: Miller v. Bonta is a Second Amendment challenge to California’s restriction on assault weapons.

Everytown filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit arguing that California’s restriction is constitutional under the approach to Second Amendment cases set out in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen. First, the brief explains that the plaintiffs have not met their burden to establish that the Second Amendment’s plain text covers assault weapons. Second, it explains that the court should center its historical analysis on 1868 as opposed to 1791. It further explains that later laws are also relevant to the historical analysis, given the unprecedented societal concerns occasioned by the recent phenomena of mass shootings and the dramatic technological changes presented by the advent of modern assault weapons. Third, the brief explains that even a small number of laws can be sufficient to establish a tradition of firearm regulation under Bruen.

Decision: This case was argued before the Ninth Circuit on January 24, 2024. After argument, the court announced that it is holding the case in abeyance pending the en banc Court’s resolution of Duncan v. Bonta, a Second Amendment challenge to California’s large-capacity magazine restriction.

Case Documents