California's Open Carry Gun Ban Unconstitutional, Court Rules

Table of Contents

U.S. Appeals Court Rules California’s Open Carry Ban Unconstitutional

A U.S. appeals court has ruled that California’s ban on openly carrying firearms in most parts of the state is unconstitutional. The decision, made by a panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, sided with a gun owner in a case that challenged the state’s prohibition against open carry in counties with more than 200,000 people.

The ruling came as a 2-1 decision, with the majority opinion stating that the law violated the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The court emphasized that the state’s restrictions were not consistent with the historical traditions of firearm regulation, which was a key point established by the Supreme Court’s 2022 landmark decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

U.S. Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, argued that the Democratic-led state’s law could not stand under the new legal test set by the Supreme Court. This test requires that firearms restrictions be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” VanDyke noted that open carry is a practice that predates the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791 and is still allowed in more than 30 states.

VanDyke also pointed out that California itself allowed citizens to carry handguns openly and holstered for self-defense without penalty until 2012. He stated, “The historical record makes unmistakably plain that open carry is part of this Nation’s history and tradition.”

The ruling partially reversed a 2023 decision by a lower-court judge who had rejected a 2019 challenge to the law by gun owner Mark Baird. While the appeals court largely supported Baird’s argument, it rejected his related challenge to California’s licensing requirements in counties with fewer than 200,000 residents, which may issue open-carry permits.

Senior U.S. Circuit Judge N. Randy Smith, appointed by former President George W. Bush, dissented from the majority opinion. He argued that his colleagues “got this case half right,” claiming that all of California’s restrictions complied with the Supreme Court’s ruling.

A spokesperson for California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat who defended the state’s ban, said the office is considering its options. “We are committed to defending California’s common sense gun laws,” the spokesperson said.

The 2022 Supreme Court ruling has led to numerous court cases challenging modern firearm restrictions across the country, including in California. In September 2024, a 9th Circuit panel upheld a California law that prohibits people with concealed-carry permits from carrying firearms at several categories of “sensitive places” like bars, parks, zoos, stadiums, and museums.

Impact of the Ruling

The ruling highlights the growing tension between state gun control laws and the interpretation of the Second Amendment. As more courts evaluate firearm regulations under the standards set by the Bruen decision, the landscape of gun rights in the United States continues to evolve.

The decision also raises questions about how other states will respond to similar challenges. With over 95% of California’s population living in counties with more than 200,000 people, the implications of this ruling could affect millions of residents.

As the legal battle continues, the debate over gun rights and public safety remains a central issue in American politics. The outcome of future cases will likely shape the future of firearm regulations across the country.