Appeals Court: No 2nd Amendment Right To Public Concealed Carry

Michael Johnson hands out signs supporting concealed carry legislations to gun rights lobbyists and gun owners attending their annual convention at the Prairie Capitol Convention Center Wednesday, March 5, 2014 in ... Michael Johnson hands out signs supporting concealed carry legislations to gun rights lobbyists and gun owners attending their annual convention at the Prairie Capitol Convention Center Wednesday, March 5, 2014 in Springfield Ill. They will head to the State Capitol and hold their first rally since concealed carry legislation was passed, and within days of the first permits being issued in Illinois, gun rights advocates are expected to be in a celebratory mood, outlining efforts to tweak current concealed carry legislation, and work against any efforts to implement an assault weapons ban. (AP Photo/Seth Perlman) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The gun rights movement was delivered a setback Thursday when an appeals court based out of San Francisco said there was no Second Amendment right for a member of the public to carry a concealed weapon in a decision upholding a California firearm restriction.

“As the uncontradicted historical evidence overwhelmingly shows, the Second Amendment does not protect, in any degree, the right of a member of the general public to carry a concealed weapon in public,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said in its opinion. In a 7-4 vote, it upheld the previous ruling of a three-judge panel of the appeals court, which had been appealed to the full court.

“The Second Amendment may or may not protect to some degree a right of a member of the general public to carry a firearm in public. If there is such a right, it is only a right to carry a firearm openly,” the opinion said. “But Plaintiffs do not challenge California’s restrictions on open carry; they challenge only restrictions on concealed carry.”

The opinion noted the question of open carry had not been answered by the Supreme Court.

The case was brought by gun owners in California who had sought concealed carry licenses. The gun owners were allegedly denied licenses because they did not meet the state’s requirements, namely that they had “good cause” to carry a concealed firearm, under policies written by county sheriffs.

The challengers said the policy violated their Second Amendment rights, an argument the appeals court rejected.

The appeals court covers Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. The decision was in line with rulings in the appeals courts of the Second, Third and Fourth Circuits, but contradicted a ruling in the Seventh Circuit, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Latest Livewire
100
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. I won’t have an opinion until I hear the ethnic breakdown of the Court…/s

  2. Avatar for korvu korvu says:

    Boom

  3. Oh, this one is going to SCOTUS…I just wonder if they are willing to hear it with a 4-4 Court right now.

  4. Another reason why Hillary must win.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

94 more replies

Participants

Avatar for paulw Avatar for alliebean Avatar for old_curmudgeon Avatar for imkmu3 Avatar for mantan Avatar for frankly_my_dear Avatar for arrendis Avatar for daveyjones64 Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for 538liberal Avatar for serendipitoussomnambulist Avatar for exspectator Avatar for backlit Avatar for seedoubleyou Avatar for cincypix Avatar for hornblower Avatar for thunderclapnewman Avatar for joepaulson Avatar for cashisking Avatar for coimmigrant Avatar for owlcroft Avatar for bentobox Avatar for jsrtheta Avatar for merrygosquare101

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: