The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has given California’s new concealed carry law a new lifeline. The federal court has administratively stayed a preliminary injunction that was issued by a district court that would have blocked the Golden State’s expansion of “gun-free” zones, making most of the state a “sensitive area.”
The law known as SB 2 went into effect on Monday after a last-minute reprieve by a three-judge panel on Saturday. It expands sensitive areas where guns are banned to most locations in the state, including parks, playgrounds, public events, libraries, and 22 other places that California decided must be protected from lawful gun owners. It was passed after the Supreme Court issued an opinion stating that all states must become “shall issue.” Before the Bruen decision, much of the state was “may issue.”
YouTube star Reno May, with the help of the California Rifle Pistol Association (CRPA), Gun Owners of America (GOA), Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), and Gun Owners of California (GOC), sued the state over the law. Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), Orange County Gun Owners (OCGO), San Diego County Gun Owners (SDCGO), and California Gun Rights Foundation (CGRF) filed a similar case, Carralero v. Bonta, two weeks after May v. Bonta. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney ruled on both cases at the same time and found that SB 2 violated the Second Amendment and issued a preliminary injunction against the law.
To get a preliminary injunction, the plaintiffs bringing the challenge must prove they are likely to succeed on the merits of the case. Judge Carney could not find any historical analogs for the restrictions California wanted to enforce. In order for a gun law to be constitutional, it must be consistent with the text tradition and history of the Second Amendment. Judge Carney ruled that SB 2 was not.
Unlike Judge Carney’s order for a preliminary injunction, the Ninth Circuit’s administrative stay didn’t consider the merits of the case before issuing the stay. The three-judge panel that consisted of an Obama, Bush, and a Clinton appointee issued the stay until they can review the case. This decision is similar to how the Second Circuit stayed the preliminary injunction against New York’s Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) after a District Court judge found the law unconstitutional.
California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta celebrated the last-minute stay. He claims the law will keep the areas listed in the regulation free from guns. He didn’t address the fact that most mass shootings take place in “gun-free zones” or acknowledge the defensive uses of firearms greatly outweigh those used to injure or kill innocent people.
“This ruling will allow our common-sense gun laws to remain in place while we appeal the district court’s dangerous ruling,” Bonta said. “Californians overwhelmingly support efforts to ensure that places like hospitals, libraries and children’s playgrounds remain safe and free from guns.”
Many in the California gun community don’t know of the Ninth Circuit’s last-minute decision, meaning many are unknowingly breaking California law.
The court doesn’t have a timeline to hear the case, but the make-up of the panel and the general make-up of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals doesn’t give gun owners in California much hope, but there is a light at the end of the tunnel.
On the other side of the Country, in New York, the Antonyuk v. Hochul case might be headed toward SCOTUS. Since that case challenges the same type of law, it could knock down California’s law before the Ninth Circuit even issues a final decision.
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. Mr. Crump lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
