Rupp v. Bonta: Second Assault Weapons Ban Challenge

Rupp v. Bonta (originally Rupp v. Becerra) is a parallel challenge to California's assault weapons ban, filed in the Central District of California before Judge Josephine Staton. While Miller v. Bonta in the Southern District has received more attention, Rupp presents a separate set of plaintiffs and a distinct procedural path ^[1].

Background

The case was filed in 2017 by individual plaintiffs and the California Rifle and Pistol Association. Like Miller, Rupp challenges the constitutionality of California's assault weapons ban as defined in Penal Code sections 30510 through 30530 ^[2]. The plaintiffs argue that the banned firearms are commonly owned for lawful purposes and that the ban violates the Second Amendment.

District Court Ruling

In 2019, Judge Staton granted summary judgment in favor of the state, upholding the assault weapons ban. Applying the two-step means-end scrutiny framework then used by the Ninth Circuit, the court found that the ban survived intermediate scrutiny. This contrasted with Judge Benitez's approach in Miller, where he struck down the ban.

Ninth Circuit Proceedings

Plaintiffs appealed to the Ninth Circuit. The case was briefed and argued, but before the panel issued a decision, the Supreme Court decided Bruen and subsequently GVR'd the case for reconsideration under the new text, history, and tradition framework.

Post-Bruen Remand

On remand, the Ninth Circuit sent the case back to the district court for reconsideration under Bruen. The proceedings were ongoing when the Duncan v. Bonta en banc proceedings overtook the litigation timeline.

Current Status (2025-2026)

Following the Ninth Circuit's en banc decision in Duncan v. Bonta on March 20, 2025, Rupp has been effectively pended. No independent proceedings have advanced in Rupp since the Duncan en banc decision. The case's resolution is expected to follow the outcome of Miller v. Bonta, which is the lead assault weapons ban challenge at the Ninth Circuit level. The Miller panel ordered supplemental briefing in March 2025 on the impact of the Duncan ruling and resubmitted the case for decision in April 2025. A ruling in Miller will likely dictate the path forward for Rupp.

The assault weapons ban remains fully enforceable. All existing requirements regarding assault weapon classification, registration, and prohibited features continue to apply while both Miller and Rupp are pending.

Relationship to Miller v. Bonta

The two cases are companion challenges attacking the same statute through different courts. If the Ninth Circuit ultimately hears both cases, it may consolidate them or issue a single ruling addressing the constitutionality of California's assault weapons ban under Bruen. Having two independent district court decisions provides a broader factual record for appellate review.