Today, the SAF has sued California over its vague definition of Assault Weapons (and incidentally, the ban).
Read the press release, here
Until I get it listed on PACER, you can read the complaint, here
. Then it will be linked (as all the other cases), by name and docket in the Current 2A Cases thread (a sticky at the top of this forum).
Filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California. Don Kilmer and Jason Davis (who has posted a couple of times here) are the attorneys.
This one has probable effects to any other State that has an AWB that may be patterned after the CA AWB statutes, should it get to the circuit and win there. Admittedly, this part is a long shot. But with this plaintiff, it stands a fair chance.
I personally like the fact that they are going after the constitutionality of the CA "E-Check." This is CA penal code 12031(e), which legislatively allows for a warrantless search and seizure, merely to identify that any firearm is in fact unloaded.
Anyone in CA who may be carrying a handgun openly, must carry that firearm unloaded. This is known in CA as UOC (a designation peculiar to CA alone). According to 12031(e), any policeman has the authority to stop you and inspect your firearm to ensure it meets the law and is unloaded. In addition, any officer, who in the course of a contact, becomes aware that you have firearms in your vehicle, may then inspect those arms so as to ensure that they are in fact unloaded, per the law.
This is a detention and seizure without probable cause and without a warrant.