A three-judge panel of the Oregon Court of Appeals will “take under advisement” arguments made this week in the state’s appeal of a ruling by Harney County Circuit Judge Robert S. Raschio that tenets of Measure 114—passed narrowly by voters in November 2022—are unconstitutional under the Oregon constitution.

According to Oregonlive and the Portland Oregonian, the gun control measure, which was approved by a slim 50.7 percent margin, remains in limbo. The state appealed Raschio’s decision, and Senior Assistant Attorney General Robert A. Koch on Tuesday asserted his ruling was “far off track,” the report noted.

Beaver State anti-gunners have been frustrated by Raschio’s decision, and they want to see their restrictive regulations put in place. Measure 114 would ban ammunition magazines capable of holding more than ten cartridges. It also requires Oregonians to obtain a permit to purchase before they can actually buy a gun and pass a gun safety course, and that process includes a background check.

But, as attorney Tony Aiello, Jr., who represents gun rights groups in the case, explained, people buying guns already are required to pass a background check. Measure 114 essentially doubles up the requirements to exercise their rights.

As quoted by Oregonlive, Aiello stated, “This is a second background check. Prophylaxis upon prophylaxis. It’s unnecessary.”

According to Oregonlive, Koch argued the magazine ban tenet of the measure “promotes public safety,” but the Oregon Firearms Federation (OFF) counters on its website that this argument—an interest-balancing approach which invariably tilts toward supporting the state—“cannot be used to justify an attack on constitutional rights.”

In the 2022 Bruen decision, the U.S. Supreme Court stamped down on the use of means-end scrutiny to decide Second Amendment cases.

But buried in the coverage of this hearing was something else Aiello told the panel, and it may be a lynchpin argument: “There’s no Supreme Court case law or other case law that gives the people the authority to designate all Oregonians as inherently dangerous persons. Basically, you’re presumed unfit until you prove otherwise to the government.”

That is not how the justice system is supposed to work.

The three-judge panel consisted of Judges Josephine H. Mooney, Kristina Hellman and Darleen Ortega. After hearing almost 40 minutes of argument, they did not indicate when a decision might be issued. In the meantime, the measure remains on hold.

The law was challenged in federal court by virtually every gun rights organization on the map, including the Second Amendment Foundation, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Oregon Firearms Federation, Gun Owners of America, Firearms Policy Coalition and the Oregon State Shooting Association supported by the National Rifle Association. U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut ruled in 2023 the measure was constitutional. In all, four federal lawsuits—two of which involved SAF and FPC—were derailed but appeals were quickly filed. Those actions have languished at the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

According to the Oregon Capital Chronicle, the gun law is supported by the Alliance for a Safe Oregon, Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Measure 114 remains a “hot button issue” for Oregon voters, according to KTVZ News. It may be overshadowed for the moment by the national elections, but for gun owners in the state, the outcome of this case is critical.

In a report about the Appeals Court oral arguments, the Oregon Firearms Federation website notes, “The court did not make a decision on the constitutionality of the measure and none was expected. This will probably take several months…It’s safe to say that the battle for gun rights in an increasingly dangerous state will be going on for some time.”

But there were signals that the judges aren’t simply treating this case as a nuisance. The Oregon Capital Chronicle noted the panel has hundreds of pages of documents through which to read, and if they side with the Raschio ruling, the state will undoubtedly appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court, since Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum and Democrat Gov. Tina Kotek support the measure, and are defendants in the case.

As with its neighbors north and south, Democrat-dominated Oregon has been drifting steadily toward increasingly restrictive gun controls despite large populations of gun owners. Eastern Oregon, like Eastern Washington and Northern California, is largely conservative and gun rights are important.

About Dave Workman