SAN FRANCISCO ---- Counties and cities in California may ban gun shows on their fairgrounds and other government properties, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday.
The 6-1 decision in two cases backs local regulations banning weapons at flea markets in Los Angeles and Alameda counties. The two ordinances were passed there in 1999 among concerns that gun shows tarred the image of the counties and promoted violence.
The decision, if it stands, is expected to set off an avalanche of similar ordinances across the state. In briefs filed to the court, representatives from at least 20 cities and counties urged the justices to grant them such powers.
California's justices have never ruled on whether statewide regulation of gun sales leaves room for stronger local regulations. Until Monday, the high court has left those decisions for the lower courts to decide.
A state appeals court overturned San Francisco's 1982 ban on handgun possession, saying cities and counties cannot write such laws. But in 1998, another appeals court upheld West Hollywood's ban on cheap handguns known as Saturday Night Specials, saying a city could outlaw a gun that was legal in other parts of the state.
But on Monday, the justices entered the politically charged debate, ruling in two cases that local governments are free to outlaw gun shows that commonly occur on county fairgrounds.
"Alameda County has the authority to prohibit the operation of gun shows held on its property," Justice Carlos R. Moreno wrote in his first majority opinion since taking office in October.
In sharp dissent, Justice Janice Rogers Brown said such an initiative by a local government "exceeds its regulatory authority."
The gun industry argued to the seven justices that local governments are powerless to regulate the industry because the Legislature has authorized gun shows on public property. The industry said the local laws were pre-empted by state rules.
The two cases reached the high court after a federal appeals court, unsure of how to interpret California law, asked California's justices to intervene.
Monday's rulings do not reach into whether local governments can ban gun sales on private property. The cases only involve whether the bans can occur on public government-owned property.
The high court's ruling, however, does not end litigation in the dispute.
The justices' conclusion was forwarded to a federal appeals court hearing the two cases. Monday's decision informs the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on how to apply state law, but federal First Amendment questions remain in the litigation brought by the gun industry.
Still unresolved in the pending litigation is whether barring gun shows violates First Amendment protections of speech. Five years ago, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit overturned Santa Clara County's gun-show ban, ruling that gun sales were protected commercial speech.
The gun industry predicts the appeals court will rule the same way in the pending two cases. Industry representatives said blocking weapons shows would create a slippery slope to outlawing other types of trade shows.
"Suppose a county enacted an ordinance saying people who like to engage in the hobby of collecting Indian artifacts can no longer hold shows at the county fairground"? asked Donald E. J. Kilmer Jr., a gun industry attorney. "How do you think that would sit?"
He said the gun industry's biggest worry is that one California local government after the next would ban them. He added that no other state allows their local governments to ban gun shows on their property.
Cameron Baker, an attorney for the city and county of San Francisco, said local governments can now justify banning gun shows because of today's violent climate. "What is the justification for having to possess or sell a firearm on county property?" he asked.
San Francisco, in court briefs on behalf of nearly two dozen local governments, urged the court to give them the power to block the gun shows because "gun violence is an epidemic ravaging communities throughout California."
The National Association of Arms Shows, the Second Amendment Foundation and others urged the court to rule otherwise.
"Aside from educational opportunity, gun shows also are a political forum for views evaluating, and often criticizing, the effectiveness of gun control laws," the groups wrote. "Regardless of whether these criticisms are correct, criticism of gun control laws is core political speech."
Alameda County outlawed gun possession on county property in 1999 in response to a shooting at the fairgrounds in Pleasanton the year before.
Los Angeles County issued its ban the same year at the fairgrounds in Pomona. At the time, county lawmakers said that gun violence "has ravaged the lives of individuals."
There are 2,500 licensed firearms dealers in California. The same 10-day waiting period for persons to purchase weapons at a California gun store applies to weapons purchased at the state's gun shows. Only licensed firearm dealers can sell weapons in the state. Convicted felons are banned from buying them.
The cases are Great Western Shows v. Los Angeles County, S091547 and Nordyke v. King, S091549.
4/23/02
The dems will dig up crap on her if they havta hire Flint and make crap up.
IT WON"T WORK!!!
This judge is a incompetent fool,and needs to be impeached. Neither Alameda County or any OTHER County "owns" land. They hold it in the public trust. It is NOT private property,it is by DEFINITION public property! As such,they have no right to place restrictions on the public that are forbidden by either/both the state and the feral constitutions.
In sharp dissent, Justice Janice Rogers Brown said such an initiative by a local government "exceeds its regulatory authority."
I have to admit,I'm starting to like this woman.