SAF Win in California’s One-Gun-Per-Month Lawsuit

BELLEVUE, WA, UNITED STATES, June 20, 2025 /EINPresswire.com/ -- In a unanimous decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of SAF and its partners in Nguyen v. Bonta (No. 24-2036), SAF’s challenge to California’s one-gun-per-month gun rationing law.

SAF is joined in the case by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., and San Diego County Gun Owners PAC, two FFL gun dealers, and six private citizens including Michelle Nguyen, for whom the case is named.

“Today's decision claws back a portion of Second Amendment rights stolen by California's government,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “California’s one-gun-per-month law was in clear violation of the Second Amendment, as affirmed by the unanimous decision in the Ninth Circuit. This ruling is one step closer to liberating the people of the state from the totalitarian ideals of those in power who believe the right to keep and bear arms is a second-class right.”

The lawsuit challenges the California statute that only allows for the purchase of one handgun or semi-automatic centerfire rifle (or combination thereof), from a licensed dealer within a 30-day period. SAF secured a summary judgment win at the district court, which California then appealed to the Ninth Circuit. Today’s decision affirms SAF’s district win and strikes down the gun rationing law as impermissible under the Second Amendment.

“There was no doubt the one-gun-per-month restriction was put in place to circumvent the ability of citizens to exercise their full Second Amendment rights,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “This ruling is a victory for all who believe in the fundamental right to keep and bear arms, and we look forward to continuing to restore the Second Amendment rights of people across the nation through our more than 55 active cases.”

Matt Coffey
Second Amendment Foundation
mcoffey@saf.org
Visit us on social media:
LinkedIn
Instagram
Facebook
YouTube
X