PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — The fate of Oregon’s new gun control law passed by voters this year was heard in court Friday as the Oregon Attorney General’s Office defends the law.

Now, there is a new legal challenge to the law, bringing the total to four.

The law is scheduled to go into effect Thursday, Dec. 8 but the judge could put a temporary delay on the measure on Monday or Tuesday of that week.

However, the law itself is creating a new legal test for the second amendment and could face weeks, months or even years of legal debate.

The court heard two of the four lawsuits today dealing specifically with Measure 114’s ten-round magazine limit.

A case from New York that the Supreme Court ruled on earlier this year makes the case tougher for 114 because the court ruled if regulation wasn’t around in the 1790s then it cannot exist today.

The groups bringing the lawsuit argue magazine limits didn’t exist then and therefore should not exist today. They cite self-defense, hunting or target shooting as reasons magazine limits infringe on someone’s second amendment rights.

They say all cases ruled since the New York case was ruled this summer had struck down regulations.

But there are exceptions the State was pointing to.

One says high capacity magazines are a new technology not found in the 18th century and that society has changed because the prevalence of mass shootings that include magazines with ten or more rounds have become more common since 2007.

“The second amendment is not an absolute right, the Supreme Court has recognized states retain some ability to make regulations when there are new social ills and new technology that did not exist in 1791,” said Michael Kron, special counsel to the Attorney General’s Office.

KOIN 6 pressed Union County Sheriff Cody Bowen on what ability his office has to enforce the magazine limit.

“Right now our ability to enforce the magazine limit is none. We cannot, not only do we not have the staffing to address these, but right now personally I believe its unconstitutional,” said Cody Bowen, Union County Sheriff.

The issue of permitting was not debated much today although that’s the focus of two of the other lawsuits.

The state claimed people will be able to apply for permits by the time this law goes into effect on Dec. 8.

There was audible laughter in the courtroom when that was said and Sheriff Bowen says the notion it will be ready is a lie.

“The state is not ready at all,” Bowen said. “I can guarantee that. Anybody who says there will be a permitting process in place and ready to go and obtain a permit on December 8th is lying to you.”

In a reflection of the state not being ready, the Oregon State Police announced on Friday that unless Measure 114 is struck down, pending background check applications already in the system will be paused indefinitely.

Instead, you’ll have to get a new permit as the new law states. Once that’s done, your background check can move forward.

This announcement comes as thousands of new applications have flooded the state system since the measure was passed.

“The FICS unit has experienced unprecedented volumes of firearms transactions never seen before in the program’s 26-year history. OSP continues to work diligently to process and resolve as many of the pended/delayed FICS transactions as possible,” OSP stated in a release. “With BM114 becoming law on December 8, 2022, this gives Oregon State Police a very short window to develop a program and have technology available for use on day 1 of the new law. Because of this, the Permit-to-Purchase program at Oregon State Police will be a manual paper process until new technical systems can be designed and implemented.”

An OSP spokesperson also shared a statement with KOIN 6 News.

“OSP will not be able to complete background checks without the Permit-to-Purchase,” the spokesperson said. “However, we will continue to work on the backlog while awaiting for permits. I cannot comment on what a court delay will mean for the process until we see the language provided by the courts.”

As far as constitutionality goes, the fact voters passed measure 114 has little impact.

As an example, in the 1990s voters in colorado legalized discrimination against the LGBTQ community but the Supreme Court overturned the law because it found it was unconstitutional.