WFCN –
In a case filed in San Diego County Superior Court, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), a number of other gun rights organizations, and individual plaintiffs are contesting California’s newly imposed 11% tax on weapons, ammunition, and gun parts.
Nicolas Maduros, the director of the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, is the object of the lawsuit, James v. Maduros.
- State-by-State: Best Places to Live on a $100,000 Income
- Illinois Winner of $552M Mega Millions Jackpot Revealed as Chicagoland Local
- Reality Check: Is the IRS Actually Issuing $8700 Stimulus Checks?
- 2024 Stimulus Check Update: $1400 One-time Payment Details, Including Eligibility & Payment Schedule
- Master the Market: Billionaire Strategies for Investing in Hawaii’s Hottest Real Estate
The National Rifle Association, the California Rifle & Pistol Association, the Firearms Policy Coalition, and two private individuals, Joshua Gerken and Danielle Jaymes, are joining SAF in this legal battle.
Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C. and Michel & Associates in Los Angeles are working together to represent the plaintiffs. The legal team consists of David H. Thompson and Peter A. Patterson from Cooper & Kirk in addition to Chuck Michel, Tiffany Cheuvront, Laura Palmerin, and Joseph Dale from Michel & Associates.
Executive Vice President and founder of SAF Alan M. Gottlieb clarified, “We are contesting the constitutionality of the tax, as enacted by Assembly Bill 28.”
SEE MORE –
Trump’s Gun License at Risk of Revocation After Hush Money Trial Conviction
“In the lawsuit, we argue that this 11 percent tax is unconstitutional because it essentially taxes activities that are protected by the Second Amendment.” There is no comparable proof that this kind of tax was ever imposed during the time of the Founding, as mandated by the Bruen verdict of the Supreme Court in 2022.
Adam Kraut, the executive director of the SAF, continued, “The power to tax is literally the power to destroy.” Assembly Bill 28 grants the State of California the authority to prohibit the exercise of a constitutionally protected right by designating it as subject to a separate tax.
If this tax is permitted to remain in place, it may be increased, and California may eventually levy comparable excise taxes on other fundamental rights that it finds objectionable. Taxing the right to keep and bear guns will not put an end to this.
The action requests a permanent injunction against the state’s enforcement of AB 28’s provisions, including the tax’s collection, and a declaration that the excise tax on weapons and ammunition violates the Second Amendment. In addition, it aims to recoup legal fees and other expenses.