In the realm of Second Amendment litigation, few cases have captured as much attention and endured as long a journey as Duncan v. Bonta. This challenge to California’s prohibition on standard-capacity magazines, defined as those holding more than 10 rounds, has ping-ponged through the federal courts for nearly a decade. As of February 2026, the case sits in limbo at the U.S. Supreme Court, repeatedly relisted for conference without a decision on whether to grant review. This pattern of delays underscores the justices’ cautious approach to post-Bruen gun rights cases, potentially signaling deeper divisions or strategic timing within the Court.
The origins of Duncan v. Bonta trace back to 2016, when California voters approved Proposition 63, which banned the possession of what the state called large-capacity magazines (LCMs).
The law was built on earlier restrictions that prohibited the manufacture and sale of such magazines, but allowed existing owners to keep them. Prop 63 went further, requiring owners to surrender, sell out of state, or destroy their LCMs, with criminal penalties for non-compliance. Proponents argued that LCMs facilitate mass shootings by enabling sustained fire without reloading. Opponents, including the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) and individual plaintiffs like Virginia Duncan, contended that the ban infringes on the Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense, as LCMs are commonly used in handguns and rifles for lawful purposes.
Click the link to read the whole article: SCOTUS Punts On Duncan v. Bonta
No comments:
Post a Comment