2016 California Proposition 63

Proposition 63 is a California ballot proposition that passed on the November 8, 2016 ballot. It requires a background check and California Department of Justice authorization to purchase ammunition, prohibits possession of high-capacity ammunition magazines over ten rounds, levies fines for failing to report when guns are stolen or lost, establishes procedures for enforcing laws prohibiting firearm possession by specified persons, and requires California Department of Justice's participation in the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System.[2]

Proposition 63
Firearms and Ammunition Sales
Results
Response
 Votes %
Yes 8,663,159 63.08%
No 5,070,772 36.92%
Valid votes 13,733,931 94.00%
Invalid or blank votes 876,578 6.00%
Total votes 14,610,509 100.00%
Registered voters/turnout 19,411,771 75.27%
Results by county
Source: California Secretary of State[1]
Elections in California
Federal government
U.S. President
U.S. Senate
U.S. House of Representatives
State government (executive)
Governor
Lieutenant governor
Attorney General
Secretary of State
Treasurer
Controller
Insurance Commissioner
Superintendent of Public Instruction
State Board of Equalization
State government (legislative)
State Senate
State Assembly
State government (judicial)
Court of Appeals
Propositions
1910–1919
1960–1969
1970–1979
1980–1989
1990–1999
2000–2009
2010–2019
2020–2029
Full list
Elections by year
State elections
Anaheim
Mayor
Bakersfield
Mayoral elections
Fresno
Mayor
Irvine
Mayoral elections
Long Beach
Mayor
Los Angeles
Mayor
General
City Attorney
Board of Supervisors
Oakland
Mayor
Riverside
Mayor
Sacramento
Mayor
San Bernardino
Mayor
San Diego
Mayor
City Attorney
Municipal elections
Board of Supervisors
San Francisco
Mayor
Board of Supervisors
General elections
San Jose
Mayor
Stockton
Mayoral elections

Supporters of the measure stated that it would “fix a major flaw” put in place by the passing of Proposition 47 in 2014 by stating that theft of a firearm is a felony, regardless of its monetary value.[3]

A September 2016 poll from USC Dornsife / Los Angeles Times showed 64% percent of registered voters in favor of Proposition 63, 28% opposed, and 8% unknown.[4]

A November 2016 poll from Insights West showed 57% percent of likely voters in favor of Proposition 63, 35% opposed, and 8% undecided.[5]

Proposition 63 passed.[6]

Federal case
See also: High-capacity magazine

In March 2019, in the case Duncan v. Becerra,[7] the Federal District Court stayed enforcement of the new law as the state failed to show how this law didn't violate the Second Amendment or the property rights of owners of previously legal goods. On March 29, 2019, Judge Roger Benitez ruled Proposition 63 unconstitutional, citing lawful defensive use of firearms across the state of California, specifically in the hands of women.[8][9]

Benitez stated that various violent crimes were far more common than mass shootings, and people can use firearms to defend themselves from them providing the law allows it, giving several examples in the first few pages of the opinion. "As in the year 2017, in 2016 there were numerous robberies, rapes, and murders of individuals in California and no mass shootings. Nevertheless, a gubernatorial candidate was successful in sponsoring a statewide ballot measure (Proposition 63). Californians approved the proposition and added criminalization and dispossession elements to existing law prohibiting a citizen from acquiring and keeping a firearm magazine that is able to hold more than 10 rounds. The State now defends the prohibition on magazines, asserting that mass shootings are an urgent problem and that restricting the size of magazines a citizen may possess is part of the solution.[10]

In August 2020, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a 2–1 decision, upheld the district court's ruling.[11][12] California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has petitioned for en banc rehearing[11] by a wider 11-judge panel of the court.[13]

See also

References
  1. "Statement of Vote - November 8, 2016, General Election". December 16, 2016. Retrieved January 7, 2017.
  2. "Proposition 63. California General Election November 8, 2016. Official Voter Information Guide". California Secretary of State. Archived from the original on 11 October 2016. Retrieved 10 October 2016.
  3. "A California gun measure that's too high-stakes to fail". Editorial. The Sacramento Bee. October 2, 2016. Retrieved October 11, 2016.
  4. "USC-Dornsife/LA Times Poll". USC Dornsife September 2016 Poll. September 2016. Retrieved 11 October 2016.
  5. "Clinton is Ahead of Trump as U.S. Presidential Election Approaches". Insights West. November 2016. Retrieved 8 November 2016.
  6. McGreevy, Patrick (November 8, 2016). "California voters approve gun control measure Proposition 63". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved December 7, 2016.
  7. Attorney General Becerra Continues Fight in Duncan v. Becerra, Defending California's Law that Bans the Acquisition and Possession of Large-Capacity Magazines (press release), Office of the California Attorney General (July 16, 2019).
  8. Thompson, Don. "Federal judge blocks high-capacity ammunition ban in California". usatoday.com. Retrieved 2019-03-30.
  9. http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Duncan-2019-03-29-Order-Granting-Plaintiffs-MSJ.pdf
  10. http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Duncan-2019-03-29-Order-Granting-Plaintiffs-MSJ.pdf page 2 line 6
  11. AG Files Petition For Review of Appeals Court's Ruling Tossing Magazine Ban, City News Service (August 28, 2020).
  12. Duncan v. Becerra (9th Cir. Aug. 26, 2020).
  13. 9th Circuit Court Panel Ends California Ban On High-Capacity Magazines, CBS News/Associated Press (August 14, 2020).
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.