A new California law prohibiting licensed gun owners from carrying firearms in a variety of public places went into effect Monday despite an ongoing legal challenge to its legitimacy.
Last month, a federal district judge struck down major parts of the law as unconstitutional and issued an injunction preventing it from taking effect while gun owners challenged it in court. But a federal appeals court temporarily stayed that order on Saturday.
It is still uncertain whether the law will ultimately survive the court challenge and remain in effect in the long term, but for now the state’s licensed gun owners must comply with it.
The law, known as Senate Bill 2, prevents licensed gun carriers from having their firearms at public gatherings and special events, in parks and playgrounds, in stadiums, arenas and casinos, in medical facilities, institutions religious and financial institutions, on public transportation and in many parking areas, among other spaces.
It also prevents them from carrying their firearms anywhere where liquor is sold and consumed and in any other private commercial space where the owners have not explicitly posted a sign stating otherwise.
The law applies to concealed carry permit holders in major metropolitan centers such as Los Angeles. But it also affects open carry permit holders in rural and less populated areas of the state.
State leaders and advocates for greater gun control say the restrictions are simply common sense and only apply to “sensitive locations” where guns have no business being. Many gun owners, including the plaintiffs in the case, allege that the law is so onerous (the list of restricted spaces is so long) that it essentially makes it impossible for them to carry their firearms outside their homes.
The law was passed by the California Legislature and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year in response to several mass shootings, including in Half Moon Bay and Monterey Park, and a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court decision that halted the gun control measures at the national level.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. vs. Bruen argued that strict limits on concealed carry permits in states like New York and California amounted to unconstitutional restrictions on people’s right to self-defense, and that gun laws that are not deeply rooted in American history or They are not analogous to any historical law, they are generally unconstitutional.
He also said certain laws, including those prohibiting carrying weapons in sensitive places such as courtrooms and schools, remained valid.
In response, California and other liberal states scrambled to come up with new gun laws that accorded with Bruen enough to survive new legal challenges. State Senator Anthony Portantino (D-Burbank) introduced SB 2 as a way to expand the list of “sensitive locations” under California law. Gun owners filed a lawsuit in protest.
On December 20, U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney sided with gun owners, writing that the law’s “coverage is broad, repugnant to the Second Amendment, and openly defiant of the Supreme Court.”
Instead of being a smart solution for Bruen, Carney, an appointee of President George W. Bush, said the new law clearly clashed with her. He said a court order blocking it was warranted because those suing the state would likely win their case and suffer “irreparable harm” if they were not allowed to carry firearms in the meantime.
But on December 22, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office filed an emergency motion asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to halt or “stay” Carney’s decision pending an appeal.
“A stay is necessary to allow the State to enforce the provisions imposed by this statute, which the Legislature has determined will reduce gun violence in certain sensitive locations that involve the exercise of other constitutional rights or that attract particularly vulnerable populations, such as the children,” Bonta said. the office wrote.
A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit, composed of Judges Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Jay S. Bybee and Andrew D. Hurwitz, granted Bonta’s request, but noted that the stay was only administrative and had no bearing on any future decision. of the court. appeals court on the merits of the matter.
Rawlinson was appointed by President Clinton, Bybee by President George W. Bush, and Hurwitz by President Obama.
Newsom issued a statement praising the appeals panel’s temporary order and calling Carney’s lower court ruling “dangerous.”
“Californians overwhelmingly support efforts to ensure places like hospitals, libraries and playgrounds remain safe and gun-free,” Newsom said.
Chuck Michel, an attorney for the gun owners in the case, said Monday that he will ask the appeals court for an expedited decision on the merits. He said he believes that decision will again block the new state law as an illegitimate “ruse” to circumvent Bruen.
He said every day the law is in effect it hurts his permit clients.
“The people who have these licenses have them for a reason,” he said. “Some of them are under direct threat and now have limited ability to protect themselves and their families.”
