Well, not just California but the entire ninth circuit.
Citizens can challenge state, local gun laws
(04-20) 19:10 PDT San Francisco -- A federal appeals court ruled Monday that private citizens can challenge state and local gun laws by invoking the constitutional right to bear arms - the first such ruling in the nation - but upheld a ban on firearms at gun shows at the Alameda County Fairgrounds in Pleasanton.
So basically the Ninth Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals, which covers the entire West Coast, Alaska, Hawaii, and a couple flyover states, ruled that an individual right to bear arms (as established by the Supreme Court earlier with the Heller
decision) applies at the state and local level as well (a question that was avoided in Heller
). Which means that citizens in the entire district (California and Hawaii in particular) can now challenge firearms restrictions, including carry restrictions, on Constitutional grounds.
I haven't read the entire decision yet, but it seems the question of what level of review to apply was not addressed yet (also avoided in Heller
). However, considering it's an enumerated Constitutional right (in the original Bill of Rights, no less) it's not unlikely that it will eventually fall under strict scrutiny.
The case involved gun show organizers who were restricted from holding a gun show on the fairgrounds in Alameda County by a law banning firearms on all city/county property. The court upheld
the restriction, but stated in the ruling that the Constitutional right did apply in this case (but that, under Heller,
the fairgrounds was a "sensitive" area that could be restricted).
I'm not sure if the County can even appeal (seeing as they won), and I doubt the gun show organizers are likely to, so this is probably fairly final. To my understanding, this can be considered as a non-binding precedent in any other circuit now as well...though it can also be ignored (conflicting rulings would almost certainly trigger a Supreme Court decision).
So, yeah. Discuss? I'm thinking this will become a huge issue in California right quickly, despite the fact that (at least judging by news.google.com) it's receiving very little press coverage. For instance, you've got pretty much instant grounds to challenge any county where "may-issue" concealed carry pretty much means "no-issue," seeing as loaded open carry is also (to my knowledge) illegal. Not sure how successful some of these challenges will be, but it should be interesting to see what happens.
EDIT: I'm guessing part of the lack of coverage is the fact that this was pretty much a foregone conclusion? I mean, it hadn't happened yet
but did anybody really think that after Heller
the second amendment wasn't
going to be incorporated eventually?
EDIT: Upon further google-monkeying, I see two corrections. One, the circuit still hasn't decided whether to hear the case en banc,
so this isn't "final" final yet. Two, I should probably put "incorporation" in quotes since that term apparently technically
only applies when the Supreme Court does it.
EDIT: Also I'm retroactively making this not the thread for discussing the likelihood of success of an armed insurgency against the U.S. government by armed citizens. If anybody really wants to discuss it, start a thread and go wild.