Background
Plaintiffs challenged California and Hawaii laws that prohibited carrying firearms in numerous locations and flipped the default rule for private property to require affirmative permission for carry. The district court had preliminarily enjoined many of these provisions, but the Ninth Circuit panel reversed most of those injunctions, allowing the restrictions to take effect.
The court’s reasoning
The panel applied the Bruen text-history-and-tradition test but was criticized for relying on outlier historical laws, such as an anti-poaching ordinance and a Reconstruction-era Black Code, to justify the private property default rule. The dissent argued the panel improperly abstracted principles from unrelated laws and redefined historical locations to bypass the lack of Founding-era traditions for modern sensitive places.
The dissent
the panel failed to apply the proper standards for evaluating Second Amendment challenges, and that, in doing so, the panel largely vitiated the right to bear commonly used arms in public
Judge Collins
What it means going forward
The denial of rehearing leaves the panel’s decision intact, allowing California and Hawaii to enforce broad restrictions on firearm carry in public and private spaces, effectively limiting the right to carry to streets and sidewalks in many areas.