By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has unanimously upheld its previous preliminary injunction against a section of the California Business & Professional Code which had been used by the state to stifle gun-related advertising in Junior Sports magazine, in a First Amendment case brought by the several gun rights organizations.
The case is known as Junior Sports Magazines v. Bonta. It was brought in 2022 by the Second Amendment Foundation, Junior Sports Magazines, the California Youth Shooting Sports Association, Gun Owners of California, Redlands California Youth Clay Shooting Sports, California Rifle & Pistol Association, the CRPA Foundation and a private citizen, Raymond Brown.
“This is great news from the Ninth Circuit,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb in a prepared statement. “While this is a First Amendment case, it has strong Second Amendment overtones. Simply because California officials don’t agree with our pro-gun viewpoint, they have no right to essentially gag free speech or freedom of the press, in this case the content of Junior Sports Magazines.”
At issue is California Business and Professions Code § 22949.80, which prohibits advertising of any “firearm-related product in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors.” The Appeals Court had earlier held that this section violates the First Amendment, but upon remand, the district court “declined to preliminarily enjoin subsection (b) of Section 22949.80, which prevents the firearm industry from compiling or using personal information of minors for marketing purposes.”
“We reverse the district court and clarify that our constitutional analysis applied to the entirety of Section 22949.80,” the new opinion explicitly states.
The seven-page ruling clearly explains the lower court, upon the first remand, didn’t enjoin the entire statute.
Junior Sports had ceased circulating in California as a result of the law. However, the magazine argued that the law “posed an unconstitutional burden to free speech.” In its decision the appeals court panel agreed, noting, “Reviewing Junior Sports’ motion for a preliminary injunction, we held that it was likely to succeed on the merits of its First Amendment claim, even under an intermediate scrutiny standard of review.”
Bill Sack, SAF Legal Affairs director, stated, “We are thrilled that the Ninth Circuit clarified today that its decision striking down California’s Gun Advertising Ban applied to the law in its entirety. The First Amendment provides the protection to advertise constitutionally protected arms just as the Second Amendment codifies the protection to keep and bear them.”
