A significant legal decision unfolded on Friday as a U.S. appeals court ruled that California's prohibition on openly carrying firearms in most areas of the state is unconstitutional. The ruling emerged from a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in San Francisco, which voted 2-1 in favor of a gun owner, asserting that the state’s ban on open carry in counties with populations exceeding 200,000 infringes upon the Second Amendment right of individuals to keep and bear arms.
Notably, approximately 95% of California's residents reside in counties that fit this demographic, making the court's decision particularly impactful. U.S. Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke, appointed by former President Donald Trump, emphasized that the law enacted by the Democratic-led state could not withstand scrutiny under the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on gun rights issued in 2022. This pivotal decision, known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, was decided by the court’s 6-3 conservative majority and established a new legal framework for evaluating firearm restrictions.
Judge VanDyke pointed out that the Supreme Court's ruling mandates that firearm restrictions must align with the nation’s historical practices regarding gun regulation. He noted that open carry has historical roots that predate the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791. Furthermore, more than 30 states currently permit open carry, illustrating a broader acceptance of this practice across the country. California had previously allowed citizens to openly carry handguns for self-defense without repercussions until 2012, according to VanDyke.
The ruling partially overturned a previous decision from 2023 by a lower-court judge, who had dismissed a challenge to the open carry law initiated by gun owner Mark Baird in 2019. While the appeals court largely backed Baird’s position, it did not support his challenge regarding California’s licensing requirements in counties with populations under 200,000, which retain the ability to issue open-carry permits.
In a dissenting opinion, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge N. Randy Smith, appointed by former President George W. Bush, contended that his colleagues had only partially addressed the issue, asserting that all of California's gun restrictions were consistent with the Supreme Court's prior ruling. A spokesperson for California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat who defended the state’s ban, stated that the office is currently evaluating its next steps. “We are committed to defending California’s common-sense gun laws,” the spokesperson affirmed.
This recent ruling comes in the wake of the 2022 Supreme Court decision, which has sparked numerous legal challenges to modern firearm restrictions across the country, including within California. As the legal landscape surrounding gun rights continues to evolve, stakeholders on both sides are closely monitoring the implications of this ruling and its potential to reshape the future of firearms legislation in the state.