Posted on 01/03/2026 6:08:52 PM PST by Bullish
Open carry is unquestionably part of our Nation’s history and tradition of ‘the right to keep and bear arms
California lawmakers and governor Newsom were once again smacked down, this time by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which found that the state’s open-carry ban violates the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms.”
This isn’t the first time California has received such a constitutional smack down.
“Judge Lee, joined by Judge VanDyke, write a concurring opinion ‘to highlight how California has apparently resorted to subterfuge to deny its citizens their Second Amendment rights,” the Firearms Policy Coalition reported. They offered up many highlights:
“The Ninth Circuit has ruled that California’s ban on open carry in counties with more than 200,000 people violates the Second Amendment.
The court says California’s Mulford Act is “tainted with racial animus.”
“Reliance on such racially odious laws in this case is both conceptually suspect and inconsistent with a proper application of Bruen.”
“In addition to legal arguments, California makes a series of policy arguments in support of its law… None of these policy points can overcome the text of the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court’s commands in Bruen, or the unbroken history and tradition of allowing open carry in this country.”
“Open carry is unquestionably part of our Nation’s history and tradition of ‘the right to keep and bear arms’… California’s ban on open carry in counties with a population greater than 200,000 is therefore inconsistent with the Second Amendment.”
Judge VanDyke noted that more than 30 states currently allow open carry in some form and highlighted that California itself once allowed residents to openly carry holstered firearms for self-defense without penalty, JDJournal.com reported. Open carry is part of a “longstanding tradition” protected by the Second Amendment.
The Firearms Policy Coalition continues:
“Most Californians would have no clue. But that appears to be the very point—California tries to hide the fact that citizens in those counties have a right to open carry their weapon under the law. Our constitutional rights, however, should not hinge on a Where’s Waldo quiz.”
“California routinely sues private companies for engaging in similar deceptive conduct… Our own state government must behave better than an unscrupulous telemarketer.”
The Globe reported in 2023 when California Governor Gavin Newsom proposed a Constitutional Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to restrict gun national rights. At the time, District Judge Roger Benitez also threw out California’s 32-year ban on assault weapons, while also clarifying the deliberate and incorrect use of the label “assault weapon.”
“The Second Amendment is about America’s freedom: the freedom to protect oneself, family, home, and homeland,” District Judge Roger Benitez wrote in 2021 for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. “California’s assault weapon ban disrespects that freedom.”
In the case of the AR-15, “AR” stands for “Armalite Rifle,” named after the company that developed it.
Judge Benitez reiterated the meaning of the Second Amendment and swatted down other courts’ attempts to justify gun laws:
The Second Amendment “elevates above all other interests the right of law abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.” Heller, 554 U.S., at 635. The Supreme Court clearly holds that the Second Amendment protects guns commonly owned by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes. At the same time, “the Second Amendment confers an individual right to keep and bear arms . . . that ‘have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.’” Id. at 622. And although the Supreme Court cautioned that the Second Amendment does not guarantee a right to keep and carry “any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose,” Heller, 554 U.S., at 626, lower courts have often cited this proviso about extreme cases to justify gun laws in average contexts. There is no evidence that the Supreme Court intended that language to be a license to avoid its common sense holding in average contexts. Unfortunately, Heller’s acknowledgement of exceptions for gun laws at the extreme is in danger of swallowing Heller’s rule for the average case.”
The Globe remembers when Judge Roger Benitez warned Governor Newsom and the California Legislature several years ago to stop “nibbling around the edges of the Second Amendment.”
It appears the chickens are coming home to roost.
CA will appeal to get a full court hearing with a stay in the interim. This won’t be fully resolved until SCOTUS slaps them down.
As we’ve already seen from the current justices, the Ca gun carry ban won’t stand a chance in the SC. It’s unconstitutional as all hell.
I would like to see a city in CA that would require certain citizens to own at least one gun and have shooting ranges in a lot of school basements.
Liberal lawfare will reverse or render null this decision.
No way will the coastal liberals tolerate this.
Hawaii was forced to grant CW permits, then immediately passed laws preventing permit holders to carry much of anywhere.
Look for Calif to do similar.
Will this apply to city parks, county parks, state parks and national parks?
I hike in remote state and county parks where mountain lions are a serious threat. My defense now is singing and yelling!
Calif already did ‘do similar’ that’s what has been struck down here.
Let us know how it works out.
The National Firearms Act, the Gun Control Act, and the Hughes Amendment are all "unconstitutional as hell".
So far, so good! I scream “Hey cats! Leave me alone. I’m coming through. Get out of my way, this is MY territory.”
They pay attention.
I see your point, adventuring into the woods offers numerous dangers besides mountain lions. This may seem minor compared to a cougar, but I have been chased twice by rabid skunks and had to shoot them. This situation applies to the forests.
What about crime ridden cities where ones life is constantly at risk? Those folks deserve to open or conceal carry.
Commiefornia needs to be forced to acknowledge the 2A by allowing open carry, simplifying concealed carry and allowing out of staters with concealed licenses to carry in that state.
I will not set foot in that commie hell hole until I can be armed.
Open carry applies to everyone who can legally own guns. So you can be. The commies will have to restrict that which will be enjoined or struck down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.