California Right To Carry
Regular Member
I am posting this here instead of the California forum because my Open Carry lawsuit will have ramifications in all of the states and territories throughout the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and possibly throughout the nation.
Some of you may have been following the progress of my Federal lawsuit to overturn California's 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry. After the two recent bans on openly carrying unloaded firearms were enacted I amended my lawsuit to challenge those as well.
Few of you have read the briefs. My lawsuit was not based solely on the Second Amendment, there are Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims as well.
At the forefront of my 14th Amendment claims is an allegation that the sole motivating factor for enacting the 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry was race. Fortunately, the legislative history of former California Penal Code Section 12031, now partly codified as PC 25850, as well as the state archives on the Mulford Act of 1967 (of which PC 12031 was a part) prove the racially discriminatory intent of the legislation. Fortunately as well, the Attorney General's own publications prove that the law is, and has been, disproportionately enforced against minorities by a factor of 3/1. The evidence has been entered into the record and that is all that is needed to overturn the law under the 14th Amendment as it involves a "suspect classification" - race.
Since California Attorney General Harris did not, and cannot, provide any evidence to rebut the claim, she argued a bizarre interpretation of the Second Amendment in her opposition to my motion for summary judgment:
"the Founding Fathers championed the Second Amendment, which Nichols invokes as a weapon against allegedly racist laws, to try to legitimize Southern citizen “slave patrols” that terrorized enslaved African-Americans, and thereby to entice Southern states to support the U.S. Constitution....This Court should not overturn either the Second Amendment or what Nichols sees as its antagonist, Section 25850..."
In short, AG Harris is arguing that the Framers of the Second Amendment intended it to validate racially discriminatory gun laws and therefore overturning the 1967 California Loaded Open Carry ban would be overturning the Second Amendment.
Fingers crossed in the hope that the hostile district court judge assigned to my case buys into the AG's interpretation of the Second Amendment. It all but guarantees that the US Supreme Court will ultimately agree to hear my case. A favorable decision by the high court would be binding throughout the country and not just in California. Even if the district court doesn't go along with AG Harris' insane interpretation of the Second Amendment, the opening brief of my appeal will begin with the above quote.
Donations to my Open Carry lawsuit can be made though this page at OpenCarry.org or from my California Right To Carry website here.
Charles Nichols - President of California Right To Carry
Some of you may have been following the progress of my Federal lawsuit to overturn California's 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry. After the two recent bans on openly carrying unloaded firearms were enacted I amended my lawsuit to challenge those as well.
Few of you have read the briefs. My lawsuit was not based solely on the Second Amendment, there are Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims as well.
At the forefront of my 14th Amendment claims is an allegation that the sole motivating factor for enacting the 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry was race. Fortunately, the legislative history of former California Penal Code Section 12031, now partly codified as PC 25850, as well as the state archives on the Mulford Act of 1967 (of which PC 12031 was a part) prove the racially discriminatory intent of the legislation. Fortunately as well, the Attorney General's own publications prove that the law is, and has been, disproportionately enforced against minorities by a factor of 3/1. The evidence has been entered into the record and that is all that is needed to overturn the law under the 14th Amendment as it involves a "suspect classification" - race.
Since California Attorney General Harris did not, and cannot, provide any evidence to rebut the claim, she argued a bizarre interpretation of the Second Amendment in her opposition to my motion for summary judgment:
"the Founding Fathers championed the Second Amendment, which Nichols invokes as a weapon against allegedly racist laws, to try to legitimize Southern citizen “slave patrols” that terrorized enslaved African-Americans, and thereby to entice Southern states to support the U.S. Constitution....This Court should not overturn either the Second Amendment or what Nichols sees as its antagonist, Section 25850..."
In short, AG Harris is arguing that the Framers of the Second Amendment intended it to validate racially discriminatory gun laws and therefore overturning the 1967 California Loaded Open Carry ban would be overturning the Second Amendment.
Fingers crossed in the hope that the hostile district court judge assigned to my case buys into the AG's interpretation of the Second Amendment. It all but guarantees that the US Supreme Court will ultimately agree to hear my case. A favorable decision by the high court would be binding throughout the country and not just in California. Even if the district court doesn't go along with AG Harris' insane interpretation of the Second Amendment, the opening brief of my appeal will begin with the above quote.
Donations to my Open Carry lawsuit can be made though this page at OpenCarry.org or from my California Right To Carry website here.
Charles Nichols - President of California Right To Carry