Federal court upholds California’s restrictions on concealed carry

June 10, 2016

handgunA federal appeals court in San Francisco ruled that California counties may impose restrictions on the issuance of concealed carry permits. The court ruling states that the 2nd Amendment does not include the right to concealed carry. [LA Times]

In California, applicants who wish to carry concealed handguns in public must show they have good cause before receiving permits. The law grants county authorities broad discretion when issuing concealed carry permits. Rural California counties often have relaxed rules, while most urban counties maintain strict rules.

In 2010 and 2011, gun owners sued San Diego and Yolo counties, as well as their sheriffs, over concealed carry permit requirements. In both counties, the sheriffs said concern for one’s perennial safety is not alone justification for receiving a concealed carry permit.

Trial courts sided with the counties in both cases, but a three-judge federal appeals panel reversed the rulings. In 2015, the court voted to consolidate the cases and have an 11-judge panel hear them. Eight of the 11 judges on the panel were appointed by Democratic presidents.

On Thursday, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 7-4 ruling stating California counties may restrict concealed carry permits. The ruling also affects nine other states that have similar rules.

Judge William A. Fletcher, a Clinton appointee, stated in the ruling, “the 2nd Amendment does not protect in any degree the right to carry concealed firearms in public.”

“The 2nd Amendment may or may not protect to some degree a right of a member of the general public to carry a firearm in public,” Fletcher wrote. “If there is such a right, it is only a right to carry a firearm openly.”

Gun owners said they might appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. But, the Supreme Court has been reluctant to take gun control cases in recent years, and multiple federal appeals courts are now in agreement on the issue of restricting concealed carry.

However, gun owners do plan to mount a constitutional challenge of California’s open carry ban.

Thursday’s ruling “avoided answering the critical legal question of whether, if concealed carry is prohibited, some form of open carry of firearms must be allowed,” said Chuck Michel, the lawyer for the gun owners in the case. “California law bans open carry, so the constitutionality of that ban will now have to be tested.”


Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

100 victims. Probably 200 or more involved. If only 5% of the involved had guns, where were they?

50 dead today in Orlando… 50!!! When is it going to be enough? An AR-15 was used. You know the one, the one you say is just another “sporting rifle” but was manufactured as an ASSAULT RIFLE meant to do exactly what it did, kill a lot of people real fast! 50!!! With over 50 injured!!!

People don’t want to conceal carry assault rifles.

One savvy, armed citizen could have stopped the terrorist with their handgun.

Just in case they want it, here it is defined;




verb: bear; 3rd person present: bears; past tense: bore; gerund or present participle: bearing; past participle: borne


(of a person) carry.

“he was bearing a tray of brimming glasses”

synonyms: carry, bring, transport, move, convey, take, fetch, deliver, tote, lug

“I come bearing gifts”

As in “To keep and BEAR arms”.





past tense: infringed; past participle: infringed

actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.).

“making an unauthorized copy would infringe copyright”

synonyms: contravene, violate, transgress, break, breach; More

disobey, defy, flout, fly in the face of;

disregard, ignore, neglect;

go beyond, overstep, exceed;


“the statute infringed constitutionally guaranteed rights”

antonyms: obey, comply with

act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.

“his legal rights were being infringed”

synonyms: restrict, limit, curb, check, encroach on

As in “Shall not be INFRINGED”

Just sayin’.

The far left leaning 9th circuit court is the most overturned circuit court. They are wrong most of the time.

I don’t own guns but am glad most of my friends do. When meth head Mickey comes waltzing into a home, he’ll be rolling the dice as to whether he meets a baseball bat or a speeding chunk lead.

meth head Mickey….lol

This will be over turned….we still have a constitution even if a few judicial pinheads don’t like it. If you believe in the 2nd amendment don’t vote for Hillary what ever you do.

What are the other 9 states affected? I’m guessing New York and Illinois are two of them.

What is the Ninth Circuit?

The United States Courts for the Ninth Circuit consists of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals along with district and bankruptcy courts in the 15 federal judicial districts that comprise the circuit, and associated administrative units that provide various court services.

Ninth Circuit Districts

1. Alaska

2. Arizona

3. Central District of California

4. Eastern District of California

5. Northern District of California

6. Southern District of California

7. Guam

8. Hawaii

9. Idaho

10. Montana

11. Nevada

12. Northern Mariana Islands

13. Oregon

14. Eastern District of Washington

15. Western District of Washington

Please disregard my previous post, I missed the part about the States. My comprehension wasn’t working or something.

My preference would be to carry concealed. I do believe there is greater risk, as a private citizen, to display a firearm. Either way there is great personal liability thus responsibility in carrying. Most do not enjoy the extra payload and only carry for personal protection where risk is high and safety is very limited. I believe that it is essential that the decision to carry a firearm remain a personal choice as are the legal consequences associated with the use and or losing control of the firearm.

I very much agree about carrying concealed vs. open. Not only is there a tactical advantage with carrying concealed, it also doesn’t scare/antagonize others like open carry can.

I very much disagree with the notion of carrying only “where risk is high and safety is very limited.” If you know of such a place then you should do all that you can to avoid it, PARTICULARLY when carrying a concealed firearm. Almost all such places are completely avoidable.

One really cannot plan when they or their loved ones will become victims. Some choose to carry a firearm to help even the odds should they be attacked. Picking and choosing when to carry a firearm pretty much negates its defensive value.

This federal appeals court in San Francisco must be benched by cowards. Because open carry of firearms is illegal in CA, this decision is a clear violation of the Second Amendment. CA is going to have to allow one or the other.

I have no doubt the US Supreme Court would overturn this cowardly decision. The difficulty is having this case heard by that court.