Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

Peruta Opinion Finds No Right to Carry Concealed Firearms

Thursday, June 9, 2016

Peruta Opinion Finds No Right to Carry Concealed Firearms

A full panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today used shameful sophistry and sleight of hand to effectively deny millions of Californians their constitutional right to bear firearms in public for self-defense. The ruling came in the long-running case of Peruta v. San Diego, which challenged California’s discretionary issuance of concealed carry permits, the only option Californians have to legally exercise this right. Ignoring that fact, the court held that concealed carry of firearms in public is not protected by the Second Amendment and that discretionary permitting for it therefore does not offend that provision.

We have been reporting on the saga of the Peruta case for a number of years (including here, here, here, and here). The issue in the case is simple: Does the Second Amendment allow California officials to deny the state’s residents the only effective means they have of carrying a firearm in public for self-defense, absent a showing of an extraordinary need to do so? The answer to that question is simple – no – and it was answered correctly in an opinion by a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit back in 2014.  The panel recognized that the question at the heart of the case was “whether a responsible, law-abiding citizen has a right under the Second Amendment to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.”

Nevertheless, after that decision was issued, a majority of the full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals took it upon itself to order the case to be reheard. In reversing the panel’s decision, the full court deceptively recast the issue in the case as whether plaintiffs, who “wish to carry concealed firearms in public” but “do not satisfy the good cause requirements in their counties” nevertheless have a Second Amendment right to be issued concealed carry licenses.

The plaintiffs asserted because concealed carry licenses are the only means responsible, law-abiding Californians have to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms in California, they cannot be subject to issuance only on a showing of extraordinary need. It was the State of California, not the plaintiffs, that decided concealed carry would be the vehicle state residents had of protecting themselves from violent crime in public.

While a majority of the Ninth Circuit judges signed onto the decision to deny Californians their rights, three strongly-reasoned dissents, accounting for the opinions of four judges, called out the majority’s chicanery. The dissents correctly point out that it was the State, not the plaintiffs, who established the “concealed carry” permitting context of the case. The dissenting judges also would have explicitly held that responsible, law-abiding Americans certainly do have a right to “bear” arms in public for self-defense.  According to the dissent of Judge Conseulo M. Callahan (an appointee of President George W. Bush), the majority’s framing of the case was nothing more than “an elaborate straw man.”

While the majority opinion blithely asserts that people who believe California’s ban on open carry violates the Second Amendment have the option of challenging that ban, they ignore the fact that no provision of California law provides a means for law-abiding citizens to do so for self-defense. Thus, achieving proper standing to mount such a challenge would be difficult for anyone who does not commit a criminal violation of California’s open carry ban.

In the final analysis, the majority opinion does perform one very important public service: It provides the clearest possible example of why liberty-loving Americans need to go to the polls this November and vote for those candidates who will preserve their Second Amendment rights. The consequences of failing to do so could not be clearer.

“Once again the 9th Circuit showed how out of touch it is with mainstream Americans.  This decision will leave good people defenseless, as it completely ignores the fact that law-abiding Californians who reside in counties with hostile sheriffs will now have no means to carry a firearm outside the home for personal protection. This flawed ruling underscores the importance of the 2016 election. It is imperative that we elect a President who will appoint Supreme Court justices who respect the Second Amendment and law-abiding citizens right to self-defense,” Chris W. Cox, executive director, National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA).

TRENDING NOW
ATF Proposed Rule a Blatant Attack on American Gun Industry

News  

Saturday, May 8, 2021

ATF Proposed Rule a Blatant Attack on American Gun Industry

Two weeks ago we reported on a leaked document that appeared to be a new ATF proposed rule to amend several key definitions in federal firearm regulations

Washington: Second Amendment Banned in First Amendment Spaces After the Signing of Anti-Gun Measure

Friday, May 14, 2021

Washington: Second Amendment Banned in First Amendment Spaces After the Signing of Anti-Gun Measure

On Wednesday, despite the thousands of calls, emails, and other communication from NRA Members and Second Amendment supporters, Senate Bill 5038 advanced out of the legislature and was signed into law

Illinois: Gun Seizure Bill Resurrected, Passes House

Thursday, May 13, 2021

Illinois: Gun Seizure Bill Resurrected, Passes House

Yesterday, House Bill 1092, to expand Illinois’ program of suspending Second Amendment rights without due process, was resurrected after it previously had been re-referred to the House Rules Committee.

Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms

Gun Laws  

Thursday, January 1, 2015

Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms

CAUTION: Federal and state firearms laws are subject to frequent change. This summary is not to be considered as legal advice or a restatement of law.

Texas: Constitutional Carry Bill Heading to Conference Committee

Thursday, May 13, 2021

Texas: Constitutional Carry Bill Heading to Conference Committee

The Texas House has sent House Bill 1927, constitutional carry legislation sponsored by Rep. Matt Schaefer (R-Tyler), to a conference committee to work out the differences between the House- and Senate-passed versions of the bill.

Nevada: Gun Ban Bill Passes Committee, Headed to the Senate Floor

Thursday, May 13, 2021

Nevada: Gun Ban Bill Passes Committee, Headed to the Senate Floor

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed Assembly Bill 286 with an amendment, to end the centuries old practice of making firearms for personal use.

Texas: Senate Passes HB 1927

Thursday, May 6, 2021

Texas: Senate Passes HB 1927

Early this evening, after more than 6 hours of debate and discussion on more than two dozen amendments, the Texas Senate passed House Bill 1927, constitutional carry legislation, on an 18-13 vote.

NRA-Backed Open Carry Bill Passes South Carolina General Assembly

News  

Wednesday, May 12, 2021

NRA-Backed Open Carry Bill Passes South Carolina General Assembly

Called the most significant firearm bill to pass in South Carolina is more than 20 years, the General Assembly as sent HB 3094, an Open Carry bill, to the Governor for signature. 

New York Times Throws ATF Pity Party

News  

Monday, May 10, 2021

New York Times Throws ATF Pity Party

The publication of a lengthy New York Times or Washington Post opinion piece disguised as news that commiserates about the purportedly beleaguered state of the ever-so valiant Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). 

NICS Numbers Tell a Story

News  

Monday, May 10, 2021

NICS Numbers Tell a Story

NICS numbers rise. Readers know the rest. Self-reliance and firearms ownership are time-honored American traditions.

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.