Posts by: jsndavis

Supreme Court’s Decision Today in Cox v. Sony Delivers Major Inadvertent Win for the Firearms Industry: Reinforcing Protections Against Secondary Liability for Third-Party Misconduct

Supreme Court’s Decision Today in Cox v. Sony Delivers Major Inadvertent Win for the Firearms Industry: Reinforcing Protections Against Secondary Liability for Third-Party Misconduct

By Jason Davis March 25, 2026 In a landmark ruling issued today, the U.S. Supreme Court in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment (No. 24–171) slammed the door on expansive theories of secondary copyright liability for internet service providers (ISPs). The unanimous opinion, authored by Justice Thomas, holds that an ISP like Cox is not contributorily liable for its…read more →

26 Mar, 2026
Urgent Alert for California Firearms Dealers & 2A Supporters California DOJ Bureau of Firearms Proposes New Civil Fines Regulations – Your Comments Are Due by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, March 30, 2026

Urgent Alert for California Firearms Dealers & 2A Supporters California DOJ Bureau of Firearms Proposes New Civil Fines Regulations – Your Comments Are Due by 5:00 p.m. on Monday, March 30, 2026

By Jason Davis, Esq. The Davis Law Firm – calgunlawyers.com March 24, 2026 The California Department of Justice Bureau of Firearms has released modified proposed regulations titled “Civil Fines for Firearms Dealers.” These rules would create a new four-level fine schedule, allow inspectors broad discretion to classify violations using vague and subjective factors, and impose fines up to $3,000 per…read more →

24 Mar, 2026
The Davis Law Firm Secures Settlement With DOJ, FBI, Bondi, Patel, and USA Restoring Improperly Denied Firearm Rights for Client

The Davis Law Firm Secures Settlement With DOJ, FBI, Bondi, Patel, and USA Restoring Improperly Denied Firearm Rights for Client

Mission Viejo, CA – February 19, 2026 – The Davis Law Firm today announced the resolution of the federal lawsuit addressing a wrongful denial of a firearm, NICS appeal, and Voluntary Appeal. The settlement, dated September 30, 2025, fully resolves Mr. Kyle Hilton’s claims under 18 U.S.C. § 925A that he was wrongly denied firearm purchases and possession due to…read more →

19 Feb, 2026
New Mandatory Annual Training for California Firearms Dealers: What You Need to Know About SB 241

New Mandatory Annual Training for California Firearms Dealers: What You Need to Know About SB 241

As California continues to evolve its firearms regulations, licensed dealers and their employees must stay ahead of new compliance requirements to avoid potential pitfalls. On February 2, 2026, the California Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Firearms, issued an advisory detailing the implementation of Senate Bill 241 (SB 241). This law, enacted as Chapter 250 of the Statutes of 2023,…read more →

19 Feb, 2026
California’s AB 1127 and the Pawn Shop Predicament: Unintended Consequences of the Convertible Pistol Ban

California’s AB 1127 and the Pawn Shop Predicament: Unintended Consequences of the Convertible Pistol Ban

Introduction: A New Era in California Firearm Pawn Regulation In October 2025, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1127 (AB 1127) into law. Effective July 1, 2026, the bill adds Penal Code section 27595, prohibiting licensed firearms dealers from selling, offering for sale, exchanging, giving, transferring, or delivering “semiautomatic machinegun-convertible pistols.” These are defined under the new PC 16885 as…read more →

17 Feb, 2026
Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California’s Urban Open Carry Ban in Landmark Second Amendment Ruling

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down California’s Urban Open Carry Ban in Landmark Second Amendment Ruling

In a pivotal decision released today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has partially invalidated California’s stringent restrictions on the open carry of firearms, declaring the state’s ban on open carry in urban counties (>200,000 population) unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The case, Baird v. Bonta (No. 24-565) (Opinion attached below), pits individual gun rights against state…read more →

3 Jan, 2026

LASD’s Concealed Carry Permit Processing: A Post-Bruen Boom, Backlog Battle, and Federal Intervention

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen fundamentally reshaped America’s concealed carry landscape, invalidating subjective “may-issue” permitting schemes and ushering in a more objective “shall-issue” era. In Los Angeles County—one of California’s most populous and historically restrictive jurisdictions—the ruling triggered a dramatic surge in Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) applications, overwhelming the…read more →

17 Nov, 2025
The Due Process and Takings Implications of Typographical Errors in California’s “Assault Weapons” Legislation: A Case Study of the Steyr AUG – NOW AN “ASSAULT WEAPON”

The Due Process and Takings Implications of Typographical Errors in California’s “Assault Weapons” Legislation: A Case Study of the Steyr AUG – NOW AN “ASSAULT WEAPON”

The Due Process and Takings Implications of Typographical Errors in California’s Assault Weapons Legislation: A Case Study of the Steyr AUG Abstract California’s “assault weapons” legislation, originating with the Roberti-Roos “Assault Weapons” Control Act of 1989 (AWCA), codified in Penal Code § 30510, employs a list-based approach to prohibit specific firearms by name and model. This article scrutinizes a longstanding…read more →

5 Nov, 2025
California’s Prohibition on Firearm Possession and Control for Individuals Under 21: Implications for Dealers, Employees, and Customers

California’s Prohibition on Firearm Possession and Control for Individuals Under 21: Implications for Dealers, Employees, and Customers

In California, firearm regulations extend far beyond mere sales and transfers, encompassing even temporary possession or control of guns. This is particularly relevant for licensed firearms dealers employing or interacting with individuals under 21 years old, whether as customers browsing inventory or as employees handling stock. The state’s laws are stricter than federal baselines, creating a complex landscape for compliance….read more →

30 Oct, 2025
Understanding California’s Penal Code Section 29860: Relief from Firearm Prohibitions for Retroactive Bans

Understanding California’s Penal Code Section 29860: Relief from Firearm Prohibitions for Retroactive Bans

In California’s complex landscape of gun control laws, Penal Code Section 29860 stands out as a provision designed to offer a measure of fairness to individuals caught in the web of evolving firearm restrictions. This section allows certain people prohibited from owning firearms due to misdemeanor convictions to petition for relief—but only under specific circumstances. As gun laws continue to…read more →

24 Oct, 2025
‹123456›»