California has issued a direct challenge to the United States Supreme Court at the intersection of gun and abortion rights, as Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a firearms bill embracing the doctrine of private enforcement.

Californians can now sue manufacturers and citizens who distribute banned assault weapons or ghost guns under the new law. Newsom explicitly modeled the concept after a Texas law that was upheld by the Supreme Court and allows people to file legal claims against abortion providers.

By requesting and then signing the bill, Newsom has set a legal precedent while highlighting the ideological divide between liberal California and a conservative Supreme Court on politically charged issues.

The governor has stated that the bill is intended to protect Californians from gun violence. It also sends a message to the Supreme Court, whose rulings Newsom and other California Democrats have criticized, essentially daring it to uphold the gun law or reconsider its logic in supporting Texas’ approach.

“The question is whether they are complete and utter hypocrites and frauds if they reject our bill, which is modeled after the abortion bill in terms of private right of action to go after assault weapons,” Newsom said earlier this month.

However, the law may be on shaky legal ground. Even Democratic legislators who support gun control stated as much when the bill was passed, admitting that it used a dubious legal strategy in the service of a larger goal.

“It is my hope and desire that this bill ultimately does not proceed because the Texas law is found to be wrong, unconstitutional, and insane,” state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) said before voting for the bill in April.

It also drew vehement opposition from Newsom’s ideological allies, who warned that he was empowering the very type of reasoning he had condemned. “There is no way to ‘take advantage of the flawed logic’ of Texas law,” the ACLU California Action said in a statement, warning of “a radical and dangerous assault on our constitutional structure” that could “escalate a ‘arms race’ of new weapons to curtail rights adjudication by setting up bounty-hunting schemes on politically sensitive issues.”

Days earlier, Newsom signed a bill similar to this one, which allows individual Californians, the attorney general, cities, and counties to sue gun manufacturers for negligence. The legislation is similar to a recently enacted New York law that has so far survived legal challenges. “If you’ve been injured or a family member has been killed by a gun, you can now go to court and hold these manufacturers of lethal weapons accountable,” Newsom said in a video message.

Both gun lawsuit bills, as well as California’s broader universe of firearms restrictions, could be jeopardized after the Supreme Court embraced a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment in striking down concealed carry permits. California responded by granting some discretion over who can receive permits while also pursuing new legislation to impose new requirements.

Democrats have continued to push for new gun restrictions as a string of mass shootings, including one at a school in Uvalde, Texas, and one just blocks from the state Capitol in Sacramento, bolstered their resolve. However, the Supreme Court’s decision could jeopardize restrictions such as California’s bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, both of which are being challenged in court.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision, California and other states are charting a new gun law landscape, determining how far they can go under a new legal standard. Over the next few years, this process will be played out in blue state legislatures and courts.