loud, you can let citizens enforce the law, he wants to use the same legal framework, the same loophole, to ban the sale of assault rifles, letting private citizens sue makers of sul weapons in california. i want to bring in staff writer liam dillon. grad good to have you on. thank you for having me. tell me more about what else the governor is saying about this, and the chances it will actually happen. sure, saturday night the governor issued a press release saying he wanted to basically do the same thing that texas did, almost a poke in the eye, right, based on what the security has allowed at least so far to give private citizens the opportunity to, i guess, enforce the law, and then evade federal court review. in case case what he is looking to do in california, which is well-known for being an anti-gun state, trying to deter the manufacture and sale of assault rifles by allowing private
have been made of the last few days. but make if you are wafer and i hope they give you some confidence. professor faust, thank you very much need for coming on. the governor of california, gavin newsom, says he ll be pushing for a new law modelled after texas s anti abortion law but to tackle gun control in the west coast state. the bill would allow private californian citizens to sue for up to $10,000 anyone who manufactures, distributes or sells an assault weapon or ghost gun kit . the law would mirror texas s anti abortion law, which relies on private citizens for enforcemment and was held up earlier this month by the us supreme court. in doing so, the democratic governor of california argued this weekend that the court had endorsed states ability to create similar legal mechanisms to safeguard its laws from federal court review. i m joined now by berkeley law professor khiara bridges shejoins me now from oakland. lovely to have you on the programme.
justices considered this ban. they are asking to ignore texas s claim saying that this is insulated from federal court review. this is what she said about the implications.
clinic that apprized abortion in texas. the second four was from the u.s. the justice department case was argued by the brand-new solicited general of the united states, elizabeth prelogar and because the justice department went second, she had the benefit of having the last word today. as the justices considered both of these challenges to texas s ban. but the texas clinic and the justice department are asking the court to allow the challenges of the texas law to go forward, to ignore texas s claim that having vigilante random citizens enforce this thing means that this thing is insulated from federal court review. but this is how she closed the arguments today, listen to her explain to the judges the implications if the side with texas instead. the final point is to just step back for a moment and think about the startling implications of texas s argument here. across the argument this morning texas position is that no one can sue. not the women whose