California Governor Gavin Newsom announced support Friday for a new anti-gun bill that would allow private citizens to sue gun manufacturers. Newsom claims the bill is modeled after the enforcement mechanism of the Texas Heartbeat Act, and stated his goal is, in part, to expose “hypocrisy” among conservatives. However, Newsom has already failed in his mission. The legislation (AB 1594) is significantly different from the legal framework and enforcement mechanism of the life-saving Texas Heartbeat Act.
All activity targeted by the California legislation is already illegal in the state, including manufacturing or selling “assault” weapons or breaking other gun control laws. The anti-gun bill would add a private cause of action to enforce these laws, but such activity is already subject to criminal penalties in the state.
Why isn’t California actually doing anything new? (Take in mind the fact that the bill doesn’t challenge Supreme Court precedent on guns, unlike the Texas Heartbeat Act, which directly attacked Roe v. Wade.) Democrats are too afraid to identically mirror Texas’ bold legal approach. If the bill passes the state Legislature and a gun owner or manufacturer violates the law in order to challenge the policy in court, this could give an opportunity to the conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court to uphold Second Amendment rights.
Liberal lawmakers know they would have no chance in court if they attack an established constitutional right. Thus, the Texas Heartbeat Act is successful because abortion is not in the United States Constitution, and the Supreme Court of the United States is closely examining this fabricated right. Texas Right to Life supports the Texas Heartbeat Act because there is no basis for legalizing elective abortion in the U.S. Constitution, and the phony legal fiction of Roe v. Wade must be directly and boldly attacked.
For now, the anti-gun bill has not actually passed into law; it was simply filed in the state Legislature. While leftists think the Texas Heartbeat Act avoids checks and balances (and they think they’re doing so here), the reality is that the bill is still subject to the legislative process and to the judiciary if it becomes law. Not a single pro-abortion advocate testified against the Texas Heartbeat Act while it was being considered in the Legislature. In the judiciary, if there are concerns about the constitutionality of the legislation, the proper venue for those concerns will be in a concrete case of when an individual is sued under the private cause of action. The Texas abortion industry was afraid of this option and chose to voluntarily stop abortions on children with detectable heartbeats.
Meanwhile, we celebrate the 100 babies saved each day from abortion because of the historic Texas Heartbeat Act!
