Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

Anti-Gun Governor Grabs Headlines with Phony, Insincere Proposal to Amend Away Your Rights

Monday, June 12, 2023

Anti-Gun Governor Grabs Headlines with Phony, Insincere Proposal to Amend Away Your Rights

California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is presiding over a state in decline, with violent crime rising in the state and once renowned cities like San Francisco now cautionary tales of urban squalor. Residents and businesses are fleeing locales that have all but abandoned the idea of law enforcement, if not fleeing the state altogether.

But nothing succeeds in Newsom’s brand of politics like failure, and with his sights set firmly on national office, the Golden State governor is now receiving fawning attention in the mainstream press for an unserious proposal to rewrite the Second Amendment. The “plan” would be to change the current wording that protects what the U.S. Supreme Court has characterized as a preexisting, fundamental right rooted in concepts of self- and corporate defense into an affirmative grant of authority to the U.S. government to restrict and impede gun ownership. The fact Newsom is taking this tact to garner national attention for himself, however, may say more than he or his supporters realize about how overreaching California-style gun control already is.

It’s ironic that the U.S. Constitution and its constraints are suddenly of interest to Newsom, especially when it comes to gun control. There is precious little bad thinking in gun control that isn’t already binding law in California. This includes versions of every item on Newsom’s list of proposed changes, i.e., banning adults under age 21 from purchasing firearms; banning private sales and transfers of firearms; a waiting period for gun purchases; and banning “civilian” purchase of so-called “assault weapons.” Newsom pitches these “ideas” by emphasizing (and grossly exaggerating) their supposedly broad bi-partisan support. But they remain the minority approach among U.S. states, and none of them (except limitations on handgun purchases by young adults) are federal law.

Just how far Newsom would go with these proposals is unknown; there appears to be no text of his amendments for public review. That alone strongly indicates that publicity, not policy-making, is the real impetus of his effort. But even from a policy-making standpoint, Newsom’s proposal is incoherent.

First, as shown by the most exhaustive analysis of gun control’s effectiveness to date – conducted by the non-partisan RAND Corporation – none of these policies has “supportive” evidence for decreasing violent crime or reducing firearm-related mortality.

Second, if the policies are as popular as he claims, the political process itself should be enough to see them enshrined into law. Indeed, that has been the case in California and in other states where anti-gun sentiment prevails in the legislature. It’s also a fact that each item on this list is perennial fodder for anti-gun bills introduced in the U.S. Congress. Clearly, gun control supporters at all levels of government are already convinced that nothing in the U.S. Constitution stands in the way of these laws. No serious or well-informed person, in any case, believes an anti-gun politician would forgo a politically feasible gun control win over quibbles about its constitutionality. Yet if Congress won’t even pass bills to enact these laws, who could believe both houses would vote by a two-thirds margin to take the far more difficult, consequential, enduring, and politically perilous step of supporting a constitutional amendment to implement them? It is unpopularity, not reverence for the Constitution, that dooms the items on Newsom’s list.

Third, even Newsom’s fellow travelers in the media who are happy to give him national exposure and favorable coverage for his silly plan admit it is all but hopeless. The antigun Los Angeles Times characterized it as “a longshot proposal with little chance of passing in a nation deeply divided on the issue.” As that outlet correctly notes, many states are not only rejecting proposals like the ones on Newsom’s list, they are affirmatively removing restrictions to favor the right to keep and bear arms.  Meanwhile, the generally pro-gun Republican Party wields control of 22 states, with the generally anti-gun Democrat Party dominant in 17 states. For the amendment to arise from the states themselves, two-thirds would have to support a call for a constitutional convention for that purpose. And assuming Newsom’s proposal survived that convention intact, three-quarters of the states would have to ratify it. That sort of state-generated constitutional action has NEVER occurred on ANY issue during the entire history of the U.S. It certainly won’t occur on one of the most divisive issues in modern politics.

Finally, if Newsom really believes that the U.S. Constitution must be amended to accommodate the four items on his list, then he is necessarily admitting that existing laws to this effect are constitutionally void or at least highly problematic. If that’s true, then the oath he took as governor to support and defend the Constitution of the United States should compel him to seek repeal of California’s own versions of those laws or at least to withhold defense of them against court challenges. It would also establish an extraordinary concurrence with the NRA’s own view of those laws.

If, on the other hand, he believes those laws are valid, then he is being nakedly political and insincere with his calls for a constitutional amendment to enable them. That would establish the NRA’s own view that Newsom’s “28th Amendment” effort is merely an expensive and time-wasting “publicity stunt.”  

It’s also important to understand that what Newsom is really proposing is a fundamental constitutional revolution that would turn a constitutional protection against government overreach into a tool for the government to crack down on the people. That explains more about how Gavin Newsom approaches governance than anything his critics could say.

TRENDING NOW
U.S. Senate Forced to Remove Pro-Gun Language from Reconciliation Bill

News  

Friday, June 27, 2025

U.S. Senate Forced to Remove Pro-Gun Language from Reconciliation Bill

Today, the U.S. Senate was forced to remove the pro-gun language that had been previously included in the Reconciliation Bill currently making its way through the chamber. We explained in a previous article that this language would, ...

U.S. House Passes Reconciliation Bill, Removing Suppressors from the National Firearms Act

News  

Second Amendment  

Thursday, May 22, 2025

U.S. House Passes Reconciliation Bill, Removing Suppressors from the National Firearms Act

Earlier today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R.1 the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which included Section 2 of the Hearing Protection Act, completely removing suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA).

U.S. Court of Appeals Backtracks on Adverse Suppressor Ruling

News  

Monday, June 23, 2025

U.S. Court of Appeals Backtracks on Adverse Suppressor Ruling

In a single sentence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit added to the high-profile and consequential national conversation on firearm suppressors.

U.S. Senate Adds Pro-Gun Tax Relief Language Back into Reconciliation Bill

News  

Saturday, June 28, 2025

U.S. Senate Adds Pro-Gun Tax Relief Language Back into Reconciliation Bill

Overnight, the U.S. Senate added pro-gun tax relief language back into the Reconciliation bill after the Senate Parliamentarian struck out an earlier provision.  While this new provision is not as expansive as the language we advocated for which ...

North Carolina: Update on Gun Bills Moving through the General Assembly

Tuesday, June 24, 2025

North Carolina: Update on Gun Bills Moving through the General Assembly

Recently, House Bill 193 (H193) was reported favorably out of both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Rules Committee, with amendments.

Minnesota: Shotgun-Only Hunting Zones Repealed

Friday, June 20, 2025

Minnesota: Shotgun-Only Hunting Zones Repealed

On Monday, June 9th, outside of regular session, the Senate passed the Environment Omnibus bill, removing shotgun-only hunting zones in the state. 

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down CA’s One-Gun-A-Month Law

Friday, June 20, 2025

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down CA’s One-Gun-A-Month Law

Today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that California’s law prohibiting people from buying more than one firearm in a 30-day period violates the Second Amendment.

Michigan: Senate Passes Anti-Gun Bills—Now Headed to the House

Wednesday, June 25, 2025

Michigan: Senate Passes Anti-Gun Bills—Now Headed to the House

Earlier today, the Michigan Senate passed several anti-gun bills that threaten the rights of law-abiding gun owners. These bills will now move to the House where they will await a committee assignment for further consideration. ...

Switched Off: A Case Study on Minnesota’s Illegal Machine Gun Law

News  

Monday, June 23, 2025

Switched Off: A Case Study on Minnesota’s Illegal Machine Gun Law

There’s been a lot of noise of late about auto sears or so-called “Glock switches” – devices to convert a semiautomatic firearm into an automatic weapon. 

Senate Finance Committee Releases Text of Reconciliation Bill

News  

Monday, June 16, 2025

Senate Finance Committee Releases Text of Reconciliation Bill

Today, the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance released its portion of the Senate version of the Reconciliation Bill. Late last month, the U.S. House passed a version of the Reconciliation Bill which included Section 2 of the ...

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.