Attorney General Bob Ferguson issued the following statement after a Cowlitz County Superior Court judge presiding over an enforcement action against Gator’s Custom Guns ruled that Washington’s ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines is unconstitutional.
“Today’s decision is incorrect and we will immediately file a motion asking the State Supreme Court to keep this public safety law in effect. Every court in Washington and across the country to consider challenges to a ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines under the U.S. or Washington Constitution has either rejected that challenge or been overruled. This law is constitutional. It is also essential to addressing mass shootings in our communities. This law saves lives, and I will continue to defend it.”
The Attorney General’s Office will file an emergency motion to the State Supreme Court seeking a stay, or halt, to this ruling. If that emergency stay is not granted, firearm dealers will be able to again start offering magazines with the capacity to hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition for sale. These magazines are frequently used in mass shootings. Washington’s law prohibits the sale, manufacture, and distribution of high-capacity magazines, but does not prohibit ownership of those magazines.
Ferguson filed a lawsuit against Kelso-based Gator’s Guns in September. Gator’s continued selling high-capacity magazines — potentially thousands — after the state’s law went into effect. The lawsuit asserts the retailer intentionally violated the Consumer Protection Act when it unlawfully offered 11,408 high-capacity magazines for sale to the public. As part of their defense, Gator’s challenged the constitutionality of the law.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, every other court that has considered a challenge to a law restricting high-capacity magazines around the country under the Second Amendment and article I, section 24 of the Washington Constitution has either rejected that challenge, or been overruled. Only two federal district courts have ruled against such laws, and both of those rulings were stayed by higher courts. One of these rulings — in a California lawsuit challenging that state’s law — is currently pending in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which also covers Washington. The Ninth Circuit held oral arguments in the case — Duncan v. Bonta — last month.
Ferguson has successfully resolved two other cases against businesses that sold high-capacity magazines in violation of the law. Ferguson has also successfully defended the law banning the sale of high-capacity magazines, and other gun safety laws, against multiple legal challenges.
Other cases challenging Washington’s high-capacity magazine law
There are two federal court cases challenging Washington’s ban on the sale of high-capacity magazines. Neither case has been successful in blocking Washington’s law. They are:
- Brumback v. Ferguson (Eastern District of Washington) — This case was brought by Gimme Guns and others, represented by the Silent Majority Foundation. Ferguson defeated a motion for a preliminary injunction in September 2023, allowing the law to remain in effect. The case is currently stayed pending the outcome of Duncan v. Bonta at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Oral arguments in Duncan were held March 19.
- Sullivan v. Ferguson (Western District of Washington) — This case was filed by the Second Amendment Foundation and others. It is also currently stayed pending the outcome of Duncan v. Bonta.
- Mitchell v. Atkins (Western District of Washington) — This case, filed by the National Rifle Association, Second Amendment Foundation and others, challenged Initiative 1639. The AG’s office won a partial motion to dismiss in 2019, and partial summary judgment in 2020. Plaintiffs appealed, and after the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the case back to the trial court for further proceedings in light of the decision. In November 2023, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed all but one claim (related to the dormant commerce clause). In February 2024, the court granted the state’s motion for summary judgment on the remaining claim, and dismissed the case.
- Guardian Arms v. Inslee (Thurston County Superior Court) — Plaintiffs including the Silent Majority Foundation challenge House Bill 1240, which bans the sale of assault weapons in Washington. We defeated a motion for a temporary restraining order in June of 2023, and a preliminary injunction motion in September of 2023, allowing the law to remain in effect. The plaintiffs appealed the PI decision, but the state Supreme Court denied their request for discretionary review. This case is proceeding toward trial in 2025.
- Hartford, et al. v. Ferguson, et al. (Western District of Washington) — Plaintiffs including the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition challenge House Bill 1240, which bans the sale of assault weapons in Washington. The court denied plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in June 2023, allowing the law to remain in effect. The case is currently stayed pending the outcome of Duncan v. Bonta at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
- Silent Majority Foundation v. Inslee (Thurston County Superior Court) — Plaintiffs including the Silent Majority Foundation challenge House Bill 1705, banning ghost guns. The case originated in Stevens County, where the court denied plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction in March 2023. The court also granted our motion to transfer the case to Thurston County Superior Court, and the plaintiffs appealed that decision. However, the court of appeals declined to review it.
- Banta v. Ferguson (Eastern District of Washington) — This case, filed by Aero Precision, National Shooting Sports Foundation and others, challenges House Bill 1240, which bans the sale of assault weapons in Washington. The court heard arguments on a motion for preliminary injunction in August 2023 but has not yet ruled.
- National Shooting Sports Foundation v. Ferguson (Eastern District of Washington) — Plaintiffs National Shooting Sports Foundation challenge SB 5078 establishing duties of firearm industry members. On March 8, the court ruled in the state’s favor and dismissed the case.