Gavin Newsom had announced it with a few caustic words, written under the influence of “indignation”, on December 12 last. “If Texas can ban abortion and put lives at risk, California can ban weapons of war and save lives,” the governor of California posted on his Twitter account. Use an opposing camp's anti-abortion law to limit the circulation of firearms? The idea of a preposterous and vindictive appearance has just been adopted in the American state.
This Friday, Californian elected officials approved a law allowing citizens to sue, individually, anyone who manufactures or sells assault rifles in the territory of the Democratic state. The goal ? Allow citizens to fight against the prohibited circulation of firearms themselves, failing to be able to put an end to the numerous shootings on American soil. That in the Uvalde school, one of the latest, notably prompted Joe Biden to approve a decree on June 24 strengthening controls for young arms buyers.
The Californian text, signed by Governor Newsom at the University of Santa Monica, where 5 people were killed by firearms, hijacks a Texas initiative dating from last year. Since December, Texans have been able to sue organizations and people who help women have abortions. "Our creator endowed us with the right to life. And yet children lose it every year, because of abortion. In Texas, we work to save these lives", boasted then on his flyers the governor of the State, Greg Abbott, long before the Supreme Court of the United States returned to abortion.
Mockery, the governor of California has since scratched the word "abortion" from Texas posters to replace it with "gun violence" in his. Californians, whose elected officials are fiercely attached to the right to abortion and in favor of a strict regulation of firearms, could thus receive 10,000 dollars in "compensation" if, in the future, they manage to convict those who manufacture, sell or transport prohibited weapons, such as assault rifles or self-assembly weapons. Just as Texans can claim the same amount if they convict someone of illegal abortion.
"If Texas can use the citizens' right to sue to attack women, then we can use that right to make California safer," California Senator Anthony Portantino, co-senator, said at a press briefing. author of this law. This, which is due to come into force on January 1, 2023, will certainly be challenged in court and will be the subject of numerous appeals by conservative organizations and the firearms lobby.
The Democrats believe in their chance to see this legislative new-born become permanent. After all, the Supreme Court, the highest American court, whose majority of judges appointed for life are conservatives, had refused to invalidate the Texas provisions restricting the right to abortion. At the time, some judges had however pointed to the risk that this antecedent would open the way to other legislative mechanisms of the same type. It is now done. "The Supreme Court opened the door. The Supreme Court said it was OK. It was a terrible decision but these are the rules that it established", hammered the governor Galvin Newsom, in a press conference.
The defenders of the bearing of weapons estimate, them, that the two situations are incomparable. "Unlike abortion, the right to own and bear arms is a constitutionally protected right," Sam Paredes, director of the Gun Owners of California association, told The New York Times. Pro-arms associations, including the very powerful National Rifle Association (NRA), have already indicated that they will initiate a legal battle against California, one of the most regulatory states in terms of armaments and at the rate of gun death 40% lower than average, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“The big difference between this law and the Texas abortion ban is the likely opinion of the Supreme Court,” Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor and specialist in labor issues, told the Los Angeles Times. second amendment. In a sign of California law's fragility, the Supreme Court last month struck down New York state gun restrictions, reinforcing the pro-gun interpretation of the law in the process. Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.
California Governor Gavin Newsom then deemed the decision "shameful" and "dangerous". The man made a name for himself by targeting Republican governors of Florida and Texas, Ron De Santis and Greg Abbott, in commercials. His aggressive way of communicating and legislating, modeled on the style adopted by Republicans since the Trump era, appeals to some Democratic circles. So much so that he is frequently questioned about possible presidential claims, which he denies having.
Still, such a public policy battle worries some American observers. They fear that it will spread to other sensitive subjects, such as contraception or the right to vote, and that in the long term these legal confrontations will destabilize the legal functioning of the country. "It is tempting for the Democrats to align themselves with Republican behavior but it is more difficult to criticize them afterwards", explains to the Express, Anne Deysine, jurist and author of the book "The United States and the democracy".
If the law is not found unconstitutional, will there be citizens willing to sue for the $10,000 bounty? “Although in Texas the law has been very dissuasive, it is difficult to predict what will happen in California. All of this shows the state of disrepair of society and democracy in the United States”, concludes the specialist.
