In defense of the Constitution, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California has ruled that requiring background checks for every ammunition purchase is unconstitutional. Yes, the Golden State’s commitment to gun control was rejected by appeals court judges; however, the sad part is that it wasn’t unanimous – it was a 2-1 ruling.

What’s the story? California’s Prop 63 became law in 2016 when the gun control maniacs in the state voted on mandating background checks for ammo and a four-year ammo permit. But lawmakers couldn’t stop there – they amended it in 2019 to require checks every time you want to buy bullets – and in person.

Judge Sandra Ikuta served up the judicial zinger: forcing law-abiding citizens to get re- vetted just to operate their guns is a meaningful constraint on the Second Amendment.

She wrote, “The right to keep and bear arms incorporates the right to operate them, which requires ammunition.” She added, “By subjecting Californians to background checks for all ammunition purchases, California’s ammunition background check regime infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.”

Democratic Governor Newsom and AG Bonta are crying foul, calling the ruling a “slap in the face.” They insist background checks are basic public safety, declaring the law a common-sense, lifesaving measure.

On the flip side, anti-gun control advocates and constitutionalists are calling this a landmark win against overreaching gun control (i.e. Democrats).

So if you were ever hopeful that gun laws, or Democrats, would get more rational, just remember…that’s not gonna happen. And once in a while, judges actually adhere to the Constitution.