BELLEVUE, WA – The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has filed an amicus brief in support of Junior Sports Magazines, Inc., in a First Amendment challenge of a California law that prohibits “advertising or marketing communication concerning any firearm-related product in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors.”

The brief was filed with the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. CCRKBA is joined by Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership and the Second Amendment Law Center.  

Junior Sports Magazines is joined in its federal lawsuit by the Second Amendment Foundation, California Youth Shooting Sports Association, Inc., Redlands California Youth Clay Shooting Sports, Inc., California Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., the CRPA Foundation, and Gun Owners of California, Inc., and Raymond Brown, a private citizen. SAF is the sister organization of CCRKBA, and California Rifle & Pistol is a CCRKBA affiliate.

“The issue here is simple,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “Junior Sports Magazines publishes a magazine titled ‘Junior Shooters,’ and because that magazine accepts advertising from firearms and ammunition manufacturers and firearms retailers, and publishes stories related to recreational and competition shooting, it is prohibited by law in California.  

“The plaintiffs in this case,” he explained, “are challenging the constitutionality of California Business and Professions Code section 22949.80, which makes it unlawful for any ‘firearm industry member’ to ‘advertise, market, or arrange for placement of an advertising or marketing communication concerning any firearm-related product in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors.’  It’s an outrageous restriction on free speech and freedom of the press.”

As noted in the 35-page amicus brief, the law “is anathema to the First Amendment. It fails to serve its intended purpose; all it does is restrain speech that is protected under the Constitution. The Court should reverse the order…and declare the statute unconstitutional.”