Senior US District Judge Roger T. Benitez declared Califonia’s assault weapon ban unconstitutional on Thursday because it violates the right to bear arms enumerated in the US Constitution’s Second Amendment. The case is in the US District Court for the Southern District of California.

The California law makes it a felony to manufacture, distribute, import, keep for sale or lend assault weapons. Its definition of assault weapon covers guns like AR-15s. Benitez found that Califonia’s “extreme policy” violates the Second Amendment because it does not pass the test used in the 2022 Supreme Court case New York Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen. Additionally, Benitez took issue with the fact that the law penalizes law-abiding citizens and “takes away” the choice from California residents to use AR-15s for self-defense. Benitez noted that it is the duty of judges to interpret the Constitution based on its “text and original understanding,” rather than public policy considerations.

In Bruen, the Supreme Court struck down a New York state law prohibiting open carry in public places, holding that the law contravened the original understanding of the Second Amendment. There, the court held that the government must affirmatively demonstrate that a gun regulation is “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition” when the plain language of the Second Amendment covers an individual’s conduct.

Here, after a lengthy historical discussion, the court concluded that the state of California failed to affirmatively prove that its regulation was consistent with historical tradition. Benitez found that it is “patently incorrect to say that governments enjoyed a robust police power to decide what firearms could be prohibited.” Benitez also acknowledged that, after the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791, it was not until 1868 that states started to pass concealed-carry handgun laws.

Benitez enjoined the state of California from enforcing its assault weapon ban. However, Benitez stayed the injunction for ten days for the decision to be appealed. The case will likely be appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

There have been other litigation this year after the Bruen ruling challenging state gun laws. In July, a federal judge for the District of Oregon ruled that Oregon Ballot Measure 114, which restricts large-capacity magazines and requires permits before purchasing a firearm, is constitutional. Additionally, in June, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that the Second Amendment of the Constitution protects non-violent offenders from federal firearm bans.