On March 21, 2025, Judge Lawrence VanDyke of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit released a video dissenting against the court’s ruling that upheld California’s ban on gun magazines holding more than 10 rounds. In the video, he disassembled firearms to illustrate his belief that large-capacity magazines are essential components protected under the Second Amendment.
- Judge VanDyke dissents against California's gun magazine ban.
- He believes large-capacity magazines are essential.
- Colleagues ruled magazines aren't "protected accessories."
- Judge Berzon criticized VanDyke's video presentation.
- VanDyke was nominated by Trump in 2019.
The recent ruling by the 9th Circuit allowed California’s law banning large-capacity gun magazines to remain in effect. The court found that such magazines are not classified as “arms” or “protected accessories,” leading to a split decision with seven judges supporting the majority and four dissenting, including VanDyke. He argued in his video that large-capacity magazines enhance firearm functionality and should be recognized as integral components rather than mere accessories.
In his dissent, VanDyke noted that these types of magazines are among the most common sold with firearms across the country. He emphasized their prevalence and importance in discussions surrounding Second Amendment rights:
- Large-capacity magazines are often included with new guns.
- They represent a significant portion of firearm sales nationwide.
Judge Marsha Berzon, who concurred with the majority ruling, criticized VanDyke’s approach, suggesting it was inappropriate for him to present himself as an expert witness without adhering to proper procedural safeguards. She labeled his actions as “wildly improper,” indicating concerns about setting precedents for future cases involving expert testimony within judicial proceedings.
This case highlights ongoing debates over gun control and Second Amendment interpretations in America. The contrasting views among judges reflect broader societal divisions regarding firearm regulation and individual rights.
