Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Discussion] California Governor Newsom Enacts Law Allowing Citizens to Sue Gunmakers Under Same Rules as Texas Abortion law


Recommended Posts

This is o devious.  Like I can not even begin to say how much I enjoy this.  Using the exact same terminology and lettering of the law that Texas enacted over abortion rights and applying it to gun makers, ghost makers/distributors and ammunition sales.


Giving citizens the right to sue to stop the sale of and distribution of weapons under the same laws and terms as the Texas GOP used in the fight against abortions.




Dec 12 (Reuters) - California Governor Gavin Newsom said he plans to use a controversial U.S. Supreme Court ruling on strict abortion curbs in Texas to design a law that would allow private citizens to sue some gun manufacturers, distributors and sellers.

The Supreme Court on Friday left in effect the Texas law that enables private citizens to sue anyone who performs or assists a woman in getting an abortion after about six weeks of pregnancy.


The Texas law was designed by the state's Republican-controlled legislature to avoid normal means of legal challenge, because rather than making state officials responsible for enforcement, it instead gave private individuals anywhere the right to sue doctors who provide abortion services in Texas and anyone else who "aids or abets" the process.

While allowing the Texas law to remain in effect, the court ruled legal challenges may proceed against the measure, which critics say amounts to vigilante justice.

California Governor Gavin Newsom makes an appearance at the California Democratic Party headquarters in Sacramento, California, U.S., September 14, 2021. REUTERS/Fred Greaves
California Governor Gavin Newsom makes an appearance at the California Democratic Party headquarters in Sacramento, California, U.S., September 14, 2021. REUTERS/Fred Greaves

Newsom, a Democrat, said on Saturday his team will work with state Attorney General Rob Bonta and the legislature to draft a proposal in line with the Texas law that would let citizens sue manufacturers, sellers or distributors of assault weapons or ghost gun kits for at least $10,000 per violation.

"I am outraged by yesterday's U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing Texas's ban on most abortion services to remain in place," Newsom said in a statement.


"If states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that compare assault weapons to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people's lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm's way."

Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissent to Friday's decision, blasted the court's majority for failing to "put an end to this madness" and warned that other states could try to copy the Texas enforcement mechanism.

President Joe Biden said he was "very concerned" by the decision to leave in place the abortion ban but said it was "encouraging" that the court allowed part of the abortion providers' lawsuit to continue.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 2
  • Wat 2
  • RoughGame 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the single most delicious twist ever.  the NRA is responding using the same wording lettering and cries about personal rights as the pro choice crowd is using against the Texas abortion ban law.




California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday pledged to empower private citizens to enforce a ban on the manufacture and sale of assault weapons in the state, citing the same authority claimed by conservative lawmakers in Texas to outlaw most abortions once a heartbeat is detected.

California has banned the manufacture and sale of many assault-style weapons for decades. A federal judge overturned that ban in June, ruling it was unconstitutional and drawing the ire of the state’s Democratic leaders by comparing the popular AR-15 rifle to a Swiss Army knife as “good for both home and battle.” California’s ban remained in place while the state appealed.

Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers in Texas this year passed a law banning abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected, which normally occurs at about six weeks into pregnancy. The Texas law allows private citizens to enforce the ban, empowering them to sue abortion clinics and anyone else who “aids and abets” with the procedure.

In a statement Monday, the National Rifle Association called the proposal a “political gun control stunt.”

“Gov. Newsom misunderstands the actions of the Supreme Court – and the limits of his war on lawful gun ownership. His promise to run roughshod over the Second Amendment is little more than political theater,” the statement reads. “He and fellow Democrats should proceed at their own peril: the American people will not tolerate another taxpayer-funded assault on constitutional freedom.”

Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Texas law to remain in effect while abortion clinics sue to block it. That decision incensed Newsom, a Democrat who supports abortion rights.

“If states can now shield their laws from review by the federal courts that compare assault weapons to Swiss Army knives, then California will use that authority to protect people’s lives, where Texas used it to put women in harm’s way,” Newsom said in a statement released by his office at 7 p.m. on Saturday.

Newsom said he has directed his staff to work with the state’s Legislature and its Democratic attorney general to pass a law that would let private citizens sue to enforce California’s ban on assault weapons. Newsom said people who sue could win up to $10,000 per violation plus other costs and attorneys fees against “anyone who manufactures, distributes, or sells an assault weapon” in California.

“If the most efficient way to keep these devastating weapons off our streets is to add the threat of private lawsuits, we should do just that,” Newsom said.

The legal fight over the Texas abortion law has focused on its unusual structure and whether it improperly limits how the law can be challenged in court. Texas lawmakers handed responsibility for enforcing the law to private citizens, rather than state officials.

The case raised a complex set of issues about who, if anyone, can sue over the law in federal court, the typical route for challenges to abortion restrictions.

Newsom’s gun proposal would first have to pass California’s state Legislature before it could become law. The Legislature is not in session now and is scheduled to reconvene in January. It usually takes about eight months for new bills to pass the Legislature, barring special circumstances.

State Sen. Brian Dahle, a Republican from Bieber, would oppose the plan but predicted it could probably pass California’s Democratic-dominated state Legislature. He said the proposal was most likely a stunt for Newsom to win favor with his progressive base of voters ahead of a possible run for president in the future.

“The right to bear arms is different than the right to have an abortion. The right to have an abortion is not a constitutional amendment. So I think he’s way off base,” Dahle said. “I think he’s just using it as an opportunity to grandstand.”

But Newsom’s Saturday night declaration is a fulfilled prophecy for some gun rights groups who had predicted progressive states would attempt to use Texas’ abortion law to restrict access to guns. That’s why the Firearms Policy Coalition, a nonprofit group that advocates for gun rights, filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court opposing the Texas law.

“If Texas succeeds in its gambit here, New York, California, New Jersey, and others will not be far behind in adopting equally aggressive gambits to not merely chill but to freeze the right to keep and bear arms,” attorney Erik Jaffe wrote on behalf of the Firearms Policy Coalition.

  • Haha 1
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, buddhahoodlum said:

So does this mean that victims of car crashes can sue automotive manufacturers? 

Can I also sue the brand of alcohol that made me drunk and crash in the first place?

California is a gimmick.

Edited by Odd.
  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

Just shows how the US is becoming two different worlds that speak different languages. Country is going to tear itself apart. 

Apparently two different worlds that speak the same language but still can't understand each other. 


Do Republicans even notice that they have been hoisted by their own petard?  Do Democrats see their inherent hypocrisy?  Both sides act like they are 100% correct all the time.  Can't we humans just agree that we're pretty much all flawed and we're all just floundering around in a mysterious world mostly trying to do the right thing while having no real idea of what that actually is?  A two party system seems to inevitably lead to extremism (people try to differentiate themselves by dreamily staring into the infinite space to the left and the right of center).  A multi party system at least forces compromise and mostly has people looking towards the center and trying to get along.  Well, at times at least.  Maybe that's the best we can hope for.  Not that we Canadians are perfect, far from it, but extremism doesn't seem to take hold as much here and I think having more respect for multiple points of view is both the chicken and the egg.  However we still have to be careful not to go down that same road towards extremism and turning complex issues into false dichotomies.



  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ilunga said:

Breaking news from Texas


Fetus shoots mother in the womb. 


NRA claims this wouldn't have happened if a good armed Fetus had been present.



Heavily armed fetus…new metal band or the only thing missing from Rep. Thomas Massie’s family Christmas card?

  • Cheers 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...