March 12, 2025 — In a significant decision this week, the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld Ballot Measure 114, a voter-approved initiative aimed at tightening gun control laws across the state. The ruling overturns a prior decision by a Harney County Circuit Court judge who had blocked the measure on constitutional grounds.
Ballot Measure 114 was passed by Oregon voters in the November 2022 election by a narrow margin, receiving just over 50 percent of the vote. The measure was crafted to introduce more stringent controls on the sale and ownership of firearms and ammunition. Among its primary provisions, the law requires individuals to obtain a permit from law enforcement before purchasing a firearm, mandates the completion of comprehensive background checks without exceptions for delays, and prohibits the sale, transfer, and possession of magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition.
Shortly after its passage, Measure 114 faced immediate legal challenges from gun rights groups, some law enforcement officials, and private citizens who argued that the measure infringed upon constitutional rights. Opponents contended that the permit-to-purchase requirement was an undue burden on law-abiding citizens and that restricting magazine capacity violated the right to bear arms under both the U.S. and Oregon constitutions.
In 2023, a judge in Eastern Oregon ruled in favor of these challenges, concluding that elements of the measure were unconstitutional under the Oregon State Constitution. This ruling effectively halted the law from going into effect, keeping Oregon’s existing gun regulations unchanged while the appeals process moved forward.
However, in its ruling on Wednesday, the Oregon Court of Appeals disagreed with the lower court’s analysis and determined that Measure 114 does not violate the state constitution. The appellate judges found that the state has the authority to impose reasonable regulations on firearm ownership to enhance public safety and reduce gun violence. The court’s opinion reflects a broader trend seen in other states where similar laws have survived judicial scrutiny, emphasizing that governments can regulate aspects of firearm access while still respecting constitutional protections.
Although this decision represents a victory for supporters of Measure 114, including advocates for stronger gun control laws and several public safety organizations, it does not mark the end of the legal battle. Opponents are expected to appeal the decision to the Oregon Supreme Court, which could place the measure’s implementation on hold pending further review.
If ultimately upheld and enacted, Measure 114 would bring Oregon in line with several other states that have adopted permit-to-purchase laws and limitations on high-capacity magazines as part of efforts to address gun violence. Supporters argue that these measures are crucial for preventing mass shootings and keeping firearms out of the hands of dangerous individuals. Critics, however, maintain that such regulations unfairly target responsible gun owners and do little to deter criminal behavior.
For now, the Court of Appeals’ decision affirms the will of the voters, signaling a potential turning point in Oregon’s approach to gun policy. As legal appeals continue, both sides of the debate will be closely watching how the state’s highest court may ultimately rule on the issue.
