Trending...
- Governor Newsom honors fallen California Highway Patrol Officer Miguel Cano
- Governor Newsom marks historic expansion of California's Film and Television Tax Credit Program, announces 16 new projects to film in the Golden State
- California: Governor Newsom announces appointments 7.2.25
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 3, 2022
Media Contact:
Rachel Davis, Chief Communications Officer, Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo, rachel.davis@sanjoseca.gov
A federal U.S. District Court again permitted the City of San José's first-in-the-nation law to overcome legal challenge. The law requires gun owners to obtain civil liability insurance, and to pay a fee to support gun violence-reduction programs. The San José City Council approved those measures in January of 2022, making it the first city, state, or jurisdiction of any kind to impose such a mandate on gun owners. Several similar proposals have emerged in other cities and states since San José's introduction of their measure.
Specifically, U.S. District Court Judge Beth Labson Freeman issued an order late Friday granting the City of San Jose's motion to dismiss on nine of the ten causes of action, or claims, brought by the two plaintiff groups, led by the National Association of Gun Rights, Inc., in separate lawsuits. Another plaintiff has since withdrawn its lawsuit by dismissing its own claims.
The Court dismissed nine out of ten of the claims, forcing the plaintiffs to amend their complaints and re-file them if those claims are to proceed. The Court disposed of several critical issues, however, for example, by holding that the "Ordinance as drafted does not [unconstitutionally] "condition" the exercise of Second Amendment rights because there are no means by which a San Jose gun owner may be deprived of his or her firearm." Judge Freeman also dismissed plaintiffs' claim that state law prevents San Jose's implementation of its ordinance, finding that "the Ordinance's compliance requirement is dissimilar to a gun licensing or registration scheme and, therefore, is not preempted by California general laws on firearm licensing or registration."
More on The Californer
On August 3, 2022, the U.S. District previously also ruled in favor of the City of San Jose by denying the gun groups efforts to seek a preliminary injunction on the implementation of the ordinance.
Tamarah Prevost, a partner with Cotchett, Pitre, & McCarthy, argued the motions for the City of San José. Ms. Prevost asserted that: "Though the court's order comes at an early stage in this litigation, it confirms the City's belief that this gun ordinance is lawful, constitutional, and reflects a sensible approach to the extremely complex problem of gun violence in San Jose."
San José Mayor Sam Liccardo, who proposed these measures and advocated for their passage, observed that "the Court has again made clear that it will not accept simplistic arguments against the constitutionality of reasonable regulations to make guns safer." Liccardo continued, "To reduce gun-related deaths and injuries in this nation, we must refocus our efforts from merely reducing the proliferation of firearms–seemingly futile in a nation already with 400 million guns– to common-sense measures that make gun possession safer. We look forward to implementing this ordinance to provide a model for safety for other cities and states nationally."
Liccardo proposed–and a majority of his Council colleagues approved–these measures as a means to reduce gun harm. Specifically, insurance would operate to compensate victims of unintentional shootings, while utilizing risk-adjusted insurance premiums to induce safer behavior among gun owners, such as using a gun safe, installing a trigger lock or chamber-load indicator, or taking gun safety courses. The fee requirement would support gun violence prevention programs, specifically supporting mental health counseling, suicide and domestic violence prevention programs, and gun safety courses targeted at residents in gun-owning households. No other city or state has yet implemented either of these types of interventions, but a gun liability insurance requirement has been previously proposed in several state legislatures—including recently in California--and Congress.
More on The Californer
The City expects the litigation to continue, as the plaintiffs may seek to amend their complaints and refile dismissed claims. The City will proceed with the implementation of the insurance requirement in the ordinance on January 1st, and will ultimately implement the fee requirement pursuant to the process and timeline set forth by the City Manager's Office.
###
About the City of San José
With more than one million residents, San José comprises the 10th largest city in the United States, and one of its most diverse cities. San José's transformation into a global innovation center in the heart of Silicon Valley has resulted in the world's greatest concentration of technology talent and development.
October 3, 2022
Media Contact:
Rachel Davis, Chief Communications Officer, Office of Mayor Sam Liccardo, rachel.davis@sanjoseca.gov
A federal U.S. District Court again permitted the City of San José's first-in-the-nation law to overcome legal challenge. The law requires gun owners to obtain civil liability insurance, and to pay a fee to support gun violence-reduction programs. The San José City Council approved those measures in January of 2022, making it the first city, state, or jurisdiction of any kind to impose such a mandate on gun owners. Several similar proposals have emerged in other cities and states since San José's introduction of their measure.
Specifically, U.S. District Court Judge Beth Labson Freeman issued an order late Friday granting the City of San Jose's motion to dismiss on nine of the ten causes of action, or claims, brought by the two plaintiff groups, led by the National Association of Gun Rights, Inc., in separate lawsuits. Another plaintiff has since withdrawn its lawsuit by dismissing its own claims.
The Court dismissed nine out of ten of the claims, forcing the plaintiffs to amend their complaints and re-file them if those claims are to proceed. The Court disposed of several critical issues, however, for example, by holding that the "Ordinance as drafted does not [unconstitutionally] "condition" the exercise of Second Amendment rights because there are no means by which a San Jose gun owner may be deprived of his or her firearm." Judge Freeman also dismissed plaintiffs' claim that state law prevents San Jose's implementation of its ordinance, finding that "the Ordinance's compliance requirement is dissimilar to a gun licensing or registration scheme and, therefore, is not preempted by California general laws on firearm licensing or registration."
More on The Californer
- Utah Metal Fabricator Titan Forge Builds Momentum with Custom Steel Projects and Spiral Staircases
- Jason Koch: Pioneering the Future of Real Estate Development in New Jersey
- Amid Trump's assault on public lands, California conserves over one million acres of land and coastal waters in just one year
- California: Governor Newsom announces appointments 7.7.25
- City of Long Beach to Upgrade Its Internet Infrastructure to Enhance City Network Reliability and Performance
On August 3, 2022, the U.S. District previously also ruled in favor of the City of San Jose by denying the gun groups efforts to seek a preliminary injunction on the implementation of the ordinance.
Tamarah Prevost, a partner with Cotchett, Pitre, & McCarthy, argued the motions for the City of San José. Ms. Prevost asserted that: "Though the court's order comes at an early stage in this litigation, it confirms the City's belief that this gun ordinance is lawful, constitutional, and reflects a sensible approach to the extremely complex problem of gun violence in San Jose."
San José Mayor Sam Liccardo, who proposed these measures and advocated for their passage, observed that "the Court has again made clear that it will not accept simplistic arguments against the constitutionality of reasonable regulations to make guns safer." Liccardo continued, "To reduce gun-related deaths and injuries in this nation, we must refocus our efforts from merely reducing the proliferation of firearms–seemingly futile in a nation already with 400 million guns– to common-sense measures that make gun possession safer. We look forward to implementing this ordinance to provide a model for safety for other cities and states nationally."
Liccardo proposed–and a majority of his Council colleagues approved–these measures as a means to reduce gun harm. Specifically, insurance would operate to compensate victims of unintentional shootings, while utilizing risk-adjusted insurance premiums to induce safer behavior among gun owners, such as using a gun safe, installing a trigger lock or chamber-load indicator, or taking gun safety courses. The fee requirement would support gun violence prevention programs, specifically supporting mental health counseling, suicide and domestic violence prevention programs, and gun safety courses targeted at residents in gun-owning households. No other city or state has yet implemented either of these types of interventions, but a gun liability insurance requirement has been previously proposed in several state legislatures—including recently in California--and Congress.
More on The Californer
- Groflex Named One of the Top 100 Manufacturing Startups in San Francisco by F6S
- BofA Directs Additional $1 Million to Los Angeles Nonprofits for Evolving Fire Recovery Needs
- Introducing LK Blue: The Cool-Girl Denim Brand That's Redefining LA Style Launches E-Commerce
- THINKWARE Announces Prime Day Deals on Best-Selling Dash Cams
- Zeta Sky Strengthens Cybersecurity Support for Ontario Businesses Facing Rising Identity & Complian
The City expects the litigation to continue, as the plaintiffs may seek to amend their complaints and refile dismissed claims. The City will proceed with the implementation of the insurance requirement in the ordinance on January 1st, and will ultimately implement the fee requirement pursuant to the process and timeline set forth by the City Manager's Office.
###
About the City of San José
With more than one million residents, San José comprises the 10th largest city in the United States, and one of its most diverse cities. San José's transformation into a global innovation center in the heart of Silicon Valley has resulted in the world's greatest concentration of technology talent and development.
0 Comments
Latest on The Californer
- California: TOMORROW: Governor Newsom to join federal, state, and local leaders to recognize six-month anniversary of Los Angeles firestorms
- Skool Alternatives Reddit: Skool vs Circle vs Whop - Did you join one yet?
- Southern Soul Artist Moe Z Releases New Single 'Set It Out' Distributed by Morris Day Entertainment
- SacraPod Suites Unveils AI-Powered 'Work + Rest' Smart Hospitality Model for Retrofitting Underused Motels Across the U.S
- Green Jacket Gateway" System: Your Definitive Path to Golfing Greatness
- From Real Estate to Reel Power: H.L Woods Carves His Legacy as a Cutting-Edge Visionary Filmmaker
- Luxury Auto Detailing Brings High-End Mobile Car Care to Cherry Valley and Surrounding Areas
- Transgender Visual Artist Debuts New Work
- Stay Cool All Day With BGMgirl Drawstring Half Wigs
- California: Governor Newsom proclaims Independence Day 2025
- Gundam GQuuuuuuX Takes Center Stage at Anime Expo 2025
- John Duffy Competes in Mr Muscle Beach
- New Release: 'The Invisible Alternative' Unveiled by Atrisk Corporation, Resilient
- Thorn & Bloom Magazine Unveils Groundbreaking Second Edition: "Breaking the Cycle"
- Cheap O SMS Launches Groundbreaking Free SMS API Service
- California: Governor Newsom signs legislation 7.3.25
- Fireworks, fun, and safety: California preps for the holiday weekend
- BillBoards Inc. Hits the Road with God Bless America Tour and Reality Series Now Streaming on Tubi TV
- Legacy vs. Legacy Gala: Celebrating the Past, Powering the Future of the L.A. Watts Summer Games
- Orion Retreats: Pioneering the Future of Conscious Leadership and Luxury Wellness Tourism