WA State Supreme Court upholds ban on high-capacity ammo magazine sales
Thursday, May 8, 2025
 |
| Photo by petr palocko on unsplash.com |
The Washington Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the state’s ban on the sale of gun ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
The law, passed in 2022, faced a challenge from a Kelso gun shop that argued the ban on selling the magazines violates the state constitution, which protects “the right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state.”
Gator’s Custom Guns also said the law ran afoul of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
In a 7-2 ruling, state Supreme Court justices disagreed.
They ruled that high-capacity magazines aren’t “arms,” but just a component of a gun, and are not generally used for self-defense. The ruling tracked with arguments attorneys for the state made before the court in January.
“By restricting only magazines of a capacity greater than 10, the statute effectively regulates the maximum capacity of magazines, leaving the weapon fully functional for its intended purpose,” Justice Charles Johnson wrote in Thursday’s opinion.
“Indeed, we can safely say that individuals are still able to exercise the core right to bear arms when they are limited to purchasing magazines with a capacity of 10 or fewer.”
Justices Sheryl Gordon McCloud and G. Helen Whitener dissented.
Attorneys for Gator’s Custom Guns, including former Republican attorney general candidate Pete Serrano, had argued that the popularity of high-capacity magazines inherently proved they abide by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling protecting firearms that are “in common use” and are “typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”
In the dissent, Gordon McCloud sided with this argument, writing that millions of people have chosen semiautomatic firearms with high-capacity magazines “as the primary tool for lawful purposes.”
“It necessarily follows that the Second Amendment protects the arms-bearing conduct at issue here,” she wrote.
Attorney General Nick Brown said the majority decision “is right on the law and will save lives.”
“Large capacity magazines are used in the overwhelming majority of mass shootings, and reducing the toll of these senseless killings is vitally important,” he continued in a social media post.
Serrano said in an interview Thursday that the ruling was “what we anticipated,” but he was glad to see two justices disagreeing with the majority.
Gator’s Guns will seek direct review by the U.S. Supreme Court, he said.
“We’re ready to take this to the next level,” Serrano said. “We believe the Second Amendment analysis in this ruling will be a draw for review by the U.S. Supreme Court.”
Gov. Bob Ferguson, a Democrat, who oversaw the case for the state during his time as attorney general, said in a statement that the ban is a “common-sense” policy “essential in addressing mass shootings.”
Posts
5 comments:
As a responsible gun owner I find the photo you chose for the article to be nothing but clickbait. The challenge to the restrictive law had nothing to with weapons of the type shown in the photo. Please keep the editorial on the editorial page.
The majority relies upon interest balancing arguments which were specifically forbidden by the DC v. Heller case. They chose politics over a Constitutional right, and in time this odious decision will be reversed by SCOTUS.
States do not have the authority to circumvent the US Constitution. Every American has basic civil rights that are not subject to the whims of state legislatures. Yes, even in Washington.
To Anonymous 7:56am - Find and send a better photo and I'll post it in place of the one in the article. - Editor
Thanks for covering this important case. There are too many mass shootings.
Interpretation of the Second Amendment is whatever the SCOTUS says it is. Until the Heller case emphasis was on the 'well regulated militia' language, and after Heller emphasis is on private citizens. Future SCOTUS decisions will likely be different than past SCOTUS decisions.
Post a Comment