By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
For the third time this week, the Second Amendment Foundation, which has become a leader in gun rights litigation, has learned the U.S. Supreme Court has distributed one of its cases for conference.
The case of , B&L Productions v. Newsom, is scheduled for conference on Friday, Jan. 24, according to a SAF announcement.
Earlier in the week, the high court distributed the cases of Snope v. Brown and Maryland Shall Issue v. Moore which both challenge Maryland’s restrictive gun control laws.
The B&L Productions case also involves as plaintiffs the California Rifle & Pistol Association, South Bay Rod & Gun Club, Asian Pacific American Gun Owners Association, Second Amendment Law Center, L.A.X. Firing Range, and several private citizens.
SCOTUS Distributes 2A Cases for Friday Conference
This has been a long-running legal battle for SF and its allies. Gun shows have been under political fire for several years in California. The B&L case “challenges California’s statutes which ban gun shows on state-owned property,” the SAF announcement noted. The gun rights organization contends that gun shows are not merely places for people to purchase or sell firearms and ammunition, but are also gathering spots for “like-minded individuals to assemble and share ideas.” As a result, SAF maintains, “the case presents questions about both the First and Second Amendments.”
“California has been trying to regulate gun shows out of existence for some time,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “It is alarming that the government of any state would attempt to legislate against the First Amendment rights of people who want to exercise their Second Amendment rights, and we will pursue this case for as long as it takes to see that justice is served.”
“The challenged laws demonstrate California’s unwillingness to respect the constitutional rights of its citizens,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “While it is no surprise California continues to demonstrate disdain for the Second Amendment, it also implicates the First Amendment and the ability for individuals to peaceably assemble and enjoy constitutionally protected freedoms. We are hopeful the Supreme Court will intervene and send a clear message to those who wish to trample our civil liberties.”
