Trump-Appointed Judge Obliterates 9th Circuit in Must-See Gun Rights Clip [WATCH]

A ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upholding California’s restriction on firearm magazine capacity has sparked significant debate, not only for its outcome but also for the unusual method of dissent employed by one of the court’s judges.

Judge Lawrence VanDyke, appointed by President Donald Trump, issued a video along with his written dissent in Duncan v. Bonta, a case challenging California’s law limiting magazines to 10 rounds.

In his dissent, VanDyke criticized the majority’s reasoning and demonstrated, using firearms, how the ruling fails to align with the realities of modern firearm function and use.

Elon Musk Called This Financial News ‘Terrifying’

The majority opinion from the seven-judge panel concluded that magazines are not essential components of firearms and are thus not protected under the Second Amendment.

Judge VanDyke strongly rejected that position, arguing that such logic could be used to undermine protections for virtually all components of a firearm.

The 18-minute video, included with his written dissent, features VanDyke standing in his office beside a credenza beneath a mounted decommissioned AK-47.

In the video, he disassembles a Sig Sauer P320 handgun used for self-defense and another firearm used for competition. As he removes the magazine and other parts, VanDyke explains the functional importance of each component.

American Made Patriotic Apparel – Save 15% with Promo Code MERICA

“California’s argument which the majority’s adopted here is that a magazine that holds more than 10 rounds is not an arm protected by the Second Amendment,” VanDyke said.

“So this 21-round magazine that comes from the factory, or a 17-round magazine, is not an arm protected by the Second Amendment.”

He continued, “Now California acknowledges that a magazine is necessary to make the firearm function, but they argue that because you can replace the standard magazine with one that holds fewer rounds — 10 rounds or less — then these higher capacity magazines are not an arm and thus wholly unprotected by the Second Amendment.”

VanDyke addressed the concern that his video may be viewed as presenting new facts in the case.

“As an appellate body, it’s obviously not our role to make factual determinations,” he said.

“So I share this not to supplement the factual record that we’re using to decide this case. Instead, I share this because a rudimentary understanding of how guns are made, sold, used, and commonly modified makes obvious why California’s proposed tests and the one my colleagues are adopting today simply does not work.”

BREAKING

Judge VanDyke posts video dissenting from unconstitutional 9th Circuit decision while disassembling guns with an AK mounted in his chambers. pic.twitter.com/4bfRd3hIdP

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) March 20, 2025

The judge writing the majority opinion criticized VanDyke’s video, calling it “wildly improper,” and suggested that by demonstrating firearm functionality, VanDyke was acting as a fact witness rather than a judge.

VanDyke, however, maintained that the purpose of the video was educational, intended to demonstrate how the majority’s logic could extend beyond magazines to other components, leading to a broader erosion of Second Amendment protections.

He pointed out that under California’s reasoning, any part of a firearm — including triggers or slides — could be deemed an unprotected accessory.

Judge VanDyke holds a magna cum laude degree from Harvard Law School, where he was an editor of the Harvard Law Review.

He also holds dual undergraduate degrees in engineering and theology and a master’s degree in engineering management.

He previously clerked for Judge Janice Rogers Brown on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

The Duncan v. Bonta case is expected to move to the U.S. Supreme Court, where California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta will likely face questions over the classification of magazines and whether their restriction violates the constitutional right to bear arms.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of LifeZette. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.