Bauer v. Becerra
9th Cir.; 15-15428 The court of appeals affirmed a judgment. The court held that the imposition of a fee on firearms purchasers to fund enforcement efforts…
June 02, 2017 at 06:31 PM
5 minute read
9th Cir.;
15-15428
The court of appeals affirmed a judgment. The court held that the imposition of a fee on firearms purchasers to fund enforcement efforts to curtail illegal firearms possession does not violate the Second Amendment.
California regulates firearm sales and transfers through the Dealer's Record of Sale (DROS) system, which requires, among other things, that “any sale, loan, or transfer of a firearm” be made through a licensed dealer. The DROS system also requires the California Department of Justice to run background checks prior to purchase, and to notify the dealer if a prospective firearm purchaser is prohibited from possessing a gun due to prior convictions and mental illness. The DROS system allows the Department to charge a fee, known as the DROS fee, to cover the cost of running these background checks and other related expenses. In 2011, the California Legislature expanded the permissible uses of the DROS fee to allow the Department to use $5 of the $19 DROS fee “for the additional, limited purpose” of funding enforcement efforts targeting illegal firearm possession after the point of sale through California's Armed Prohibited Persons System (APPS). Barry Bauer and others filed suit challenging this use of the DROS fee, arguing it violated the Second Amendment because “the criminal misuse of firearms” targeted by APPS was not sufficiently related to the legal acquisition of firearms on which the fee was imposed.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSupreme Court Upholds Law Requiring TikTok's Divestiture or Shutdown
Assessing the Second Trump Presidency’s Impact on College Sports
Willkie Farr & Gallagher Drives Legal Challenge for Uber Against State's Rideshare Laws
5 minute readSupreme Indifference? Justices Unfazed By TikTok’s Time Crunch
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250