Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s office is crowing over a decision issued by U.S. District Judge Mary Dimke to reject a motion for a preliminary injunction to block the state’s new law banning so-called “assault weapons.”
The ruling, which may be read here, leaves in place the ban in a case known as Banta, et al. v. Ferguson, et al. Judge Dimke, a 2021 Joe Biden appointee, wrote, “In sum, the data presented suggests that AR-15s are commonly owned, and some who own them do so for self-defense. However, as explained above, most courts analyzing this issue have found commonality is not enough. In fact, most courts that have considered whether the AR-15 falls under the Second Amendment’s plain text have concluded that it does not.”
Ferguson, now running to become Washington’s next governor, is widely considered to be an anti-gun Democrat. He and outgoing Gov. Jay Inslee, another Democrat, “jointly requested the bill” banning modern semiautomatic rifles. Inslee signed it into law last year. The legislation was House Bill 1240. Not a single Republican voted for the bill, and two Democrats joined the Republicans in voting against it. The final count was 56-42.
As noted by the attorney general’s press release, “The new law prohibits the sale, manufacture and import of assault weapons in Washington state while allowing reasonable exemptions for manufacture and sale to law enforcement and the military. The law does not prohibit the possession of assault weapons.”
Ferguson issued a statement following the judge’s ruling, boasting, “Once again, we defeated the gun lobby’s attempt to block the ban on the sale of assault weapons. This common-sense reform protects Washingtonians by restricting access to weapons of war that devastate entire communities. We will continue defending the law in court.”
According to a release by Ferguson’s office, he has successfully defended state gun control laws at least eight times. He has also brought three cases to enforce gun control laws.
Not stated in the release, however, was how Ferguson’s office took no action to defend the state’s firearms preemption law dating back to 1985, when the cities of Edmonds and Seattle openly violated it by adopting so-called “safe storage” ordinances. The Second Amendment Foundation and National Rifle Association challenged both laws, eventually winning a unanimous decision by the state Supreme Court, upholding the SAF/NRA victory before the state Court of Appeals and remanding the case back to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the ruling.
The challenge was brought by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Sharp Shooting Indoor Range, The Range, LLC, Aero Precision, LLC and a private citizen, Amanda Banta, for whom the case is named.
In addition to Ferguson, defendants are Washington State Patrol Chief John R. Batiste. The Seattle-based and billionaire-backed Alliance for Gun Responsibility was allowed to intervene in the case as a defendant.
