Note: I am not licensed to practice law in California. This article is merely for news and commentary purposes.
The 9th Circuit in a 2-1 decision earlier today invalidated California’s extremely restrictive concealed carry regulatory system. This system allows a great deal of leeway to individual counties and areas that issue permits. In this specific case, it was San Diego County’s requirements that require a demonstration of good cause. The desire for self-protection on its own does not count as good cause in San Diego.
The majority spends a great deal of time looking at the historical context of 2nd Amendment judicial laws and commentaries. This was similar to what Judge Posner did for the 7th Circuit decision in Moore, but what the 2nd Circuit (in New York), 3rd Circuit (in New Jersey) and 4th Circuit (in Maryland) failed to do when ruling against an individual’s right to carry a firearm outside his or her home.
The majority also looks at how by virtue of the State banning open carry, and having an extremely restrictive system for concealed carry, that the State violates the 2nd Amendment. They seem to view that a state can have one or the other as long as law-abiding citizens can use it for protection outside the home.
It should be noted that while the case dealt with California law only, the 9th Circuit (as shown in a map from the Court’s website), encompasses (among other states) Hawaii and the US territories of the Northern Mariana Islands and Guam. Hawaii, has an extremely restrictive policy for getting a concealed carry permit. The N.M.I and Guam do not allow any form of concealed carry. If the decision is not overturned, it may offer room for legal challenges in these three areas.
The written decision is not a short one, but I recommend people give it a read.