RI's high-capacity magazine ban stands after appeals court ruling. What comes next?

PROVIDENCE – A federal appeals court panel has upheld the state’s new law banning possession of firearm magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, finding that it does not violate the Second Amendment.

A three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with U.S. District Court Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr.’s refusal to issue an injunction blocking enforcement of the high-capacity magazine ban passed by state lawmakers in 2022 in the wake of mass shootings nationwide.

The appeals court found that the ban was “both consistent with our relevant tradition of gun regulation and permissible under the Second Amendment” in striking down the challenge by Big Bear Hunting and Fishing Supply in Glocester and several Rhode Island gun owners. In doing so, the court affirmed the District Court's denial of the preliminary injunction in September after finding that gun interests had not shown a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits of their claim.

'No meaningful burden on the right of self-defense'

“Rhode Island was confronted with a societal concern regarding the frequency with which [large-capacity magazines] are facilitating mass murder. The concern is unprecedented and growing, and could not have been confronted – let alone resolved – by our founders. In response, the state passed a law that places no meaningful burden on the right of self-defense as actually practiced,” the court said.

“The justification for the law is a public safety concern comparable to the concerns justifying the historical regulation of gunpowder storage and of weapons like sawed-off shotguns, Bowie knives and the like,” the court continued.

Judges William J. Kayatta Jr., Senior Judge Bruce M. Selya and Gustavo A. Gelpí decided the case.

Court: Law is legitimate exercise of police powers

The court found that the gun owners had not shown that enforcement of the law – which makes it a felony to possess a high-capacity magazine – represented an unconstitutional taking without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment.

Under the law, owners of high-capacity magazines have 180 days to modify the banned components, surrender them to police or transfer them to people in states where such magazines are legal.

More: RI gun-control lobby buoyed by election wins

Anyone found in possession of an outlawed magazine after the grace period could face up to five years in prison or a fine of up to $5,000.

“We find this regulation to be the very type of use restriction that property owners must necessarily expect ... from time to time as states legitimately exercise their police powers,” the court said.

The appeals panel similarly struck down arguments that the law violates due process under the Fourteenth Amendment because it has "retroactive effects" and is impermissibly vague.

'It's absolutely horrendous'

Frank Saccoccio, a lawyer who is president of the Rhode Island 2nd Amendment Coalition, said the decision was just plain "wrong" and not in keeping with the analysis called for by the U.S. Supreme Court in Second Amendment cases.

"I think it's absolutely horrendous ... It's based on a policy justification. That's not what the legal analysis should be," said Saccoccio, who says he represents several people charged with felonies under the law for having as few as one round above the limit.

Donald A. Fox, president of the Burrillville Town Council, said he continues to encourage every Rhode Islander not to turn in their high-capacity magazines. He said few are abiding by it.

"Police departments recognize the idiocy of this law," Fox said. "Rhode island is not any safer in the past two years since this law was passed."

The Burrillville Town Council plans to renew its status as a Second Amendment sanctuary community at its meeting next week, he said.

"We are deeply disappointed with the decision of the court, but not surprised," Brenda Jacob, of the Rhode Island Revolver and Rifle Association, said in a statement.

"Our forefathers knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote the Constitution and foresaw the depths of evil and deceit against the people that would lurk in our government, which is the very reason for the 2nd Amendment," she continued. "Be reminded, only the [temporary restraining order] was denied and we are fully committed to continue pursuing legal action."

This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: Opponents vow to keep fighting RI's high-capacity magazine ban after ruling