An appeals court ruled Thursday that California鈥檚 law banning gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition can remain in place, a decision that prompted one judge to record an unusual video dissent that shows him loading guns in his chambers.
The ruling has implications for similar laws in other states. Voters in Oregon , but has been on hold pending numerous legal challenges. Like California, Oregon鈥檚 law bans the purchase of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Oregon would also require a permit for anybody purchasing a firearm.
In 2023, U.S. District Court Judge Karin Immergut ruled that Oregon鈥檚 law . It was also appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and has been on hold pending California鈥檚 case.
Thursday鈥檚 7-4 ruling on California鈥檚 law found it was permissible under the Second Amendment because large-capacity magazines are not considered 鈥渁rms鈥� or 鈥減rotected accessories.鈥�
Even if they were, the state鈥檚 ban 鈥漟alls within the Nation鈥檚 tradition of protecting innocent persons by prohibiting especially dangerous uses of weapons and by regulating components necessary to the firing of a firearm," the opinion stated.
Judge Lawrence VanDyke disagreed, and included a link to a video of himself posted on in his dissent.
鈥淭his is the first video like this that I鈥檝e ever made,鈥� VanDyke said. 鈥淚 share this because a rudimentary understanding of how guns are made, sold, used, and commonly modified makes obvious why California鈥檚 proposed test and the one my colleagues are adopting today simply does not work.鈥�
In the video, VanDyke handles several guns in his chambers and demonstrates how they are loaded and fired. He also shows high-capacity magazines and argues that they are no different from other gun accessories that could be added to a firearm to make it more dangerous. Under the majority鈥檚 logic, he said, that would allow the government to pick and choose any of them to be banned.
Judge Marsha S. Berzon criticized VanDyke鈥檚 video in a separate opinion, saying he was including 鈥渇acts outside the record鈥� and was, in essence, appointing himself an expert witness in the case.
The law has as the state appealed a 2023 ruling by a in San Diego that it was unconstitutional. The ruling was in response to legal action filed by four individuals and the California Rifle & Pistol Association challenging the law鈥檚 constitutionality under the Second Amendment.
The majority opinion judges said their decision to uphold the law is in line with a Supreme Court that set a new standard that relies more on the historical tradition of gun regulation rather than public interests, including safety.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta praised the appeals court鈥檚 decision.
鈥淭his commonsense restriction on how many rounds a gunman can fire before they must pause to reload has been identified as a critical intervention to limit a lone shooter鈥檚 capacity to turn shootings into mass casualty attacks,鈥� Bonta said in a statement. 鈥滾et me be clear, this law saves lives.鈥�
OPB鈥檚 Conrad Wilson and Michelle Wiley contributed to this report.