In a closely watched case, an Oregon judge has blocked the enforcement of a voter-approved gun control measure, which has been dubbed “the nation’s most extreme” by critics. The ruling comes after immediate legal challenges were filed against the measure, and it is expected to be appealed, potentially reaching the state Supreme Court.
The law, known as Measure 114, was passed by Oregonians with a narrow majority of 50.65% in the November 2023 elections. However, the measure faced strong opposition from Second Amendment proponents and gun rights advocates. The law requires a permit to purchase any gun and bans the sale of magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds.
Circuit Judge Robert S. Raschio ruled that both the magazine ban and the permit-to-purchase requirement violate Article 1, Section 27 of Oregon’s constitution, which guarantees the right to bear arms for self-defense. The judge’s decision was welcomed by gun owners and their representatives, who argue that the law infringes on their constitutional rights.
Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum immediately expressed her disagreement with the ruling and vowed to appeal. She argued that the judge’s decision “needlessly puts Oregonians’ lives at risk.” The case is expected to continue to be a legal battle, with both sides firmly entrenched in their positions.
The debate in the case centered on the historical context of firearms at the time Oregon ratified its constitution in 1857. History professors testified that firearms capable of holding many rounds were rare at that time. On the other hand, a former firearm museum curator testified that early guns could fire multiple rounds and that some models with magazine-style devices existed.
The permit system proposed by Measure 114 has been another major point of contention. Gun buyers would be required to undergo a rigorous in-person demonstration of their ability to handle firearms before obtaining a permit. Supporters argue that this process is necessary to ensure responsible gun ownership and prevent gun violence. However, Judge Raschio found that the state failed to provide convincing evidence of a threat to public safety that would justify such a permitting process.
While the ruling is seen as a victory for gun rights advocates, it is not the end of the legal battle. Federal Judge Karin Immergut previously ruled in July that Oregon’s law is in line with a U.S. tradition of regulating dangerous features of weapons. Plaintiffs are currently appealing that ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The outcome of this case could have broader implications for gun control measures across the country. As the debate over gun rights and regulations continues to be a contentious issue, the decision in Oregon will likely fuel further discussions and legal challenges in other states.
