By CONRAD WILSON and MICHELLE WILEY/Oregon Public Broadcasting
In a unanimous ruling Wednesday, the Oregon Court of Appeals approved a measure that would further regulate the purchase of firearms and ammunition across the state.
The opinion finds Ballot Measure 114 does not violate the state constitution. This overturns a 2023 decision from an Eastern Oregon judge.
“We conclude that all of Measure 114 is facially constitutional,” the court wrote in an 25-page opinion published Wednesday. The three judge-panel found Harney County Circuit Court Judge Robert Raschio applied the wrong legal framework when he found the initiative unconstitutional.
Despite a green light from the state’s appeals court, the voter-approved initiative won’t go into effect immediately.
Opponents vowed to appeal.
“Today Measure 114 has turned millions of Oregonians into criminals because their right to bear arms has been erased by Oregon’s Judiciary,” lead counsel Tony Aiello, Jr., a senior associate at Tyler Smith & Associates, P.C., said in a statement. “We intend to appeal this ruling to the Oregon Supreme Court and call on Oregonians for their continued support of this litigation.”
Backers of Measure 114 welcomed the court’s ruling.
“This victory goes to the Oregonians who, concerned about the safety of their families and communities, collected signatures, knocked on doors and voted for a safer future,” Jess Marks, executive director for the Alliance for a Safe Oregon, said in a statement. “We’re grateful that the Court of Appeals has heard our voices and examined the undeniable research and evidence to reach the conclusion that Measure 114 will save lives.”
Ballot Measure 114 bans purchases of magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. It also requires a permit before purchasing a firearm. In order to get a permit, a buyer has to pass a criminal background check and complete a gun safety course.
Supporters note the law also closes a loophole, which allows gun transfers to go forward if a background check takes longer than three days. It’s known as the “Charleston Loophole,” named for the 2015 mass shooting at a church in South Carolina. The shooter would have been blocked from buying a gun if the loophole had not been in place.
The measure has faced a number of legal challenges since it was narrowly approved by voters in 2022. Shortly after passing, Harney County residents Joseph Arnold and Cliff Asmussen sued to block the law from taking effect.
In 2023, Raschio ruled Measure 114 violated the state constitution. Attorneys with the state Department of Justice appealed the ruling, arguing that Raschio’s decision was “erroneous” and that the Oregon constitution allows for reasonable restrictions on firearm sales.
Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield called Wednesday’s Court of Appeals decision “a big step forward for gun-safety in Oregon,” noting that it was passed by voters and “time we move ahead with common-sense safety measures.”
“This measure gives us the tools to make sure gun buyers go through background checks and get proper permits, helping to keep firearms out of the wrong hands and making our communities safer,” Rayfield said in a statement.
Measure 114 has also faced scrutiny in federal court.
U.S. District Court Judge Karin Immergut ruled in a separate case that the measure is permitted under the U.S. Constitution. Immergut, who was appointed by President Donald Trump during his first term, found that the measure’s permitting system did not violate the Second Amendment and that large capacity magazines “are not commonly used for self-defense, and are therefore not protected by the Second Amendment.”
That ruling was appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, but has been on hold while considering a similar law out of California. That statute, which deals with large capacity magazines, will likely be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Comment Policy