Ninth Circuit Tosses California Ghost Gun Lawsuit Over Lack Of Standing
A federal appeals court has thrown out a lawsuit brought by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and gun control advocates seeking stricter federal rules on untraceable firearms.
A three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that the state and the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence lacked legal standing to sue the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The plaintiffs had filed the suit to push the agency to enforce tighter restrictions on so-called “ghost guns”—unserialized, self-assembled firearms.
Circuit Judge Consuelo M. Callahan, writing for the panel in an 18-page decision, explained that the plaintiffs’ legal claims relied on unproven assumptions rather than concrete injury.
“Although California and GLC expended resources to combat the spread and use of ghost guns after enactment of the Final Rule, those expenditures were based on their predictions,” Callahan wrote. “But we cannot ‘endorse standing theories that rest on speculation about the decisions of independent actors . . . particularly speculation about future unlawful conduct.’”
The dismissal drew strong approval from gun rights advocates, including the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. The group commended the panel’s decision and argued that the legal challenge went beyond the bounds of the judicial system.
“The gun prohibition lobby and politicians like Bonta are using so-called ‘ghost guns’ as the new bogeyman of American gun politics,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb.
Gottlieb pointed directly to Callahan’s reasoning on standing, saying courts should not rule on potential future scenarios.
“You can’t litigate based on speculation about possible future unlawful conduct, and Judge Callahan was pretty clear about it,” Gottlieb said. “Thankfully, the justice system hasn’t gotten to the point of acting on speculation. After all, this isn’t make-believe, and we live in the real world, not one where litigation is based on science fiction.”
Gottlieb also highlighted the court involved in the decision, noting the Ninth Circuit’s typical legal reputation.
“The most significant aspect about the decision is that it came from the notoriously liberal Ninth Circuit,” he said. “Historically, such rulings wind up before an en banc panel, which could happen here, but for the moment, Bonta, the Giffords group and all the anti-gun state attorneys general submitting amicus briefs are on the losing side, which is where they belong.”
The plaintiffs have not yet announced whether they plan to petition the full Ninth Circuit for an en banc rehearing.