In a significant development for gun rights in the United States, a federal appeals court has declared California's long-standing ban on openly carrying firearms in public to be unconstitutional. The ruling, delivered on Friday, marks a major victory for gun rights advocates and poses a fresh challenge to the state's stringent firearm regulations.
The Core of the Court's Decision
The San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 decision, sided with a gun owner who challenged the state law. The law prohibited the open carry of firearms in counties with populations exceeding 200,000 people. The court found that this prohibition infringes upon the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as understood under the "Nation's history and tradition."
Writing for the majority, US Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, stated that the practice of open carry predates the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791. He emphasized that more than 30 states generally allow open carry and noted that California itself permitted the practice without penalty until 2012.
"The historical record makes unmistakably plain that open carry is part of this Nation’s history and tradition," Judge VanDyke asserted, as reported by Reuters. The ruling directly applied the precedent set by the US Supreme Court's landmark 2022 gun rights decision, which has prompted numerous challenges to firearm restrictions across the country.
Case Background and Dissenting Opinion
The case originated from a 2019 challenge filed by gun owner Mark Baird against California's open carry prohibition. While the appeals court largely agreed with Baird, it did not fully endorse his broader challenge. The panel rejected his related argument against California's licensing requirements in smaller counties (those with fewer than 200,000 residents), which have the discretion to issue open-carry permits.
The ruling partially reverses a 2023 decision by a lower-court judge who had dismissed Baird's challenge. However, the decision was not unanimous. Senior US Circuit Judge N. Randy Smith, appointed by former Republican President George W. Bush, dissented. He argued that his colleagues "got this case half right" and believed that all of California's restrictions complied with the Supreme Court's 2022 framework.
Reactions and Future Implications
The office of California's Democratic Attorney General, Rob Bonta, who defended the state's ban, stated they are "considering its options" in response to the ruling. A spokesperson reaffirmed their commitment, saying, "We are committed to defending California's common sense gun laws."
This decision adds to the complex legal landscape surrounding gun control in America post the 2022 Supreme Court ruling. It stands in contrast to another recent ruling from the same circuit. In September 2024, a different 9th Circuit panel upheld a California law that bars people with concealed-carry permits from taking firearms into "sensitive places" like parks, zoos, and museums.
The latest ruling sets the stage for potential further appeals and underscores the ongoing national debate over the scope of the Second Amendment in modern society, pitting historical interpretation against contemporary public safety concerns.
