Whether California's 'Unsafe Handgun Act' violates the Second Amendment

QUESTION PRESENTED California generally makes handguns unavailable, except those “determine[d]” to be “not unsafe.” 11 Cal. Code Regs. § 4070(a); Cal. Penal Code § 32000(a). California’s roster of “not unsafe” handguns is shrinking, as manufacturers cannot indefinitely support grandfathered models, and the state’s design demands have grown more restrictive. Since 2013, California requires new semiautomatic handguns to stamp ejected shell casings with unique microscopic arrays, but this “microstamping” technology does not exist in the market. California thus bars the acquisition of all semiautomatic handguns designed since 2013. It also bans the acquisition of most semiautomatic handguns for lacking magazine disconnect mechanisms and loaded chamber indicators, though it instructs consumers to disregard these features. Various exemptions from the ban privilege law enforcement, the entertainment industry, and surviving spouses and domestic partners of police officers, among others. The Ninth Circuit upheld California’s handgun prohibition under “intermediate scrutiny,” albeit over a dissent as to the microstamping requirement. The question presented is whether California’s “Unsafe Handgun Act,” Cal. Penal Code § 31900 et seq., violates the Second Amendment by banning handguns of the kind in common use for traditional lawful purposes. ii RULE 29.6 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT No parent or publicly owned corporation owns 10% or more of the stock in Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. or Calguns Foundation, Inc.