California’s ban on assault weapons was overturned by US District Judge Roger Benitez. In his ruling, Judge Benitez held that the ban violates the Second Amendment which gives people the right to bear arms, and that it prevents people from owning weapons that are allowed in other states.

"We cannot be and we are not deterred by this ruling," said California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who announced the state’s intention to appeal the judge’s decision to the Ninth Circuit.

In his ruling, Benitez compared AR-15s to Swiss Army knives in that they are both a "perfect combination of home defense weapon and homeland defense equipment." He also said that the law “bans an entire class of very popular hardware – firearms that are lawful under federal law and under the laws of most states and that are commonly held by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”

Some people were upset by Benitez’s comments comparing AR-15s to Swiss Army knives. "It is insulting to read his decision where he called the kind of weapon that killed my son akin to a pocket knife. Pocket knives were not invented to kill as many people as possible. Pocket knives don't tear families apart," said Mattie Scott, head of the Brady Center’s California chapter. In 1996, she lost her son to gun violence.

In 1989, California became the first state to ban semiautomatic guns after a school shooting in Stockton that left five children dead. Washington, DC, and six other states have similar bans.

A multistate coalition led by Arizona will now be asking the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn this ban. They say that the building of these “modern rifles” is lawful in 45 states. The coalition says that calling these rifles “assault weapons” is a misnomer because they are mostly used by law-abiding citizens for target practice, sport shooting, and personal protection.

A brief released by the coalition says, “There is nothing sinister about citizens keeping or bearing a modern rifle. Law-abiding citizens keeping and bearing modern rifles benefit public safety, counter-balance the threat of illegal gun violence, and help make our homes and streets safer.”

The states belonging to the coalition are Arizona, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

The Firearms Policy Coalition said in a statement that it will "aggressively litigate this case on appeal and will take every action to defend the Court's legally- and historically-correct decision up to and at the U.S. Supreme Court."

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said, “States do not have the right to dictate what is ‘necessary’ or ‘unnecessary’ when it comes to constitutional rights, and demonizing certain rifles that are widely used nationwide is an infringement on the Second Amendment."

California is working to appeal Benitez’s decision. Gov. Gavin Newsom says that this decision is “a direct threat to public safety and innocent Californians.”

“This is an average case about average guns used in average ways for average purposes,” Benitez ruled. “One is to be forgiven if one is persuaded by news media and others that the nation is awash with murderous AR-15 assault rifles. The facts, however, do not support this hyperbole, and facts matter. In California, murder by knife occurs seven times more often than murder by rifle.”

Despite the ban, 185,569 assault weapons are registered in California.

In 2019, James Miller, a resident of California, sued California over its ban on assault weapons. In his complaint, he states that he seeks to use “his lawfully acquired large-capacity magazine(s) in his California-compliant, ‘fixed magazine rifle.’”

The California assault weapons ban case will likely make it all the way to the Supreme Court.