Boland v Bonta



Injunction issued regarding CA Roster!!!


I was in Federal Court today making an appearance on an unrelated matter when my phone began to blow up….in a really really good way!


The California Rifle and Pistol Association, (CRPA) in conjunction with the law firm of Michele and Associates had filed a lawsuit challenging the CA Handgun Roster.  The legal theory behind this case goes back to the Constitutional test developed in NYSRPA v Bruen. 


The case at bar here is called Boland v Bonta.  The case was filed with Judge Carmac Carney in US District Court and the plaintiffs (us) had asked for the roster to be enjoined while the case was being litigated.  To a large extent that is what just happened today.


The roster still exists…the drop test specifically was not enjoined…but the requirement that there be a loaded chamber indicator, a magazine disconnect and micro stamping HAS BEEN ENJOINED!


So…..what does this mean?


First…don’t go to Turners tomorrow expecting to see off roster guns…each manufacturer sill needs to submit their guns to DOJ to be approved and then placed on the roster.  Also…there is the very real possibility (probability) that the State will appeal the injunction.  


Regardless….this is a major step in the right direction!…and major congratulations are in order to both CRPA and the brilliant attorneys at Michele and Associates.  


If you are not a member of CRPA yet…become one now!!!  


Well done guys!!!


I will be reviewing the decision in its entirety over the next couple of days, and will report more soon.  

Recent Posts

Comments (4)

  • ea kempt Reply

    Thank you, please send out an email when we should be able to buy the gun we want (SW CSX – 9mm ambidextrous and EZ rack). If not how will I know that I can get it. Not a member of CRPA yet but I do donate, and, when I buy Amazon, they are my charity of the smile donation! So if not a member having your Amazon smile purchase send them the percentage is almost as good.

    03/20/2023 at 15:05
  • Tim Hohmann Reply

    This seems like great news and a great step forward, but it seems like these things follow a depressing cycle:

    1. District rules against the state and issues an injunction
    2. State appeals and asks for a stay on the injunction
    3. State gets the stay until appeal process is completed
    4. Appeal process never ends (en banc, Appeals Court, Supreme Court, remand & do-over) , stay remains in place

    Case in point – we’re coming up on the fourth anniversary of Freedom Week and I still can’t legally buy or possess a 20 round magazine for my Mini-14. But maybe one day my grandchildren might be able to…

    03/20/2023 at 15:25
  • TW Reply

    Thank you, Steven. I am glad you are on our (2nd people) side.

    03/20/2023 at 17:09
  • Adam Sheck Reply

    So, State has 2 weeks or so to respond/appeal and then …
    Good start, look forward to hearing about the updates.

    03/20/2023 at 17:33

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *