By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
In a lengthy ruling covering firearms restrictions in California and Hawaii, a three-judge panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has handed a partial victory to the Second Amendment Foundation and its allies in a challenge of state laws prohibiting licensed concealed carry in so-called “sensitive places.”
The SAF case, known as May v. Bonta, was decided along with two other cases—one from California and the other from Hawaii—last Friday.
Circuit Judge Susan P. Graber, a Bill Clinton appointee, wrote the 71-page opinion for the court, which affirmed an injunction against California’s restrictions “with respect to hospitals and similar medical facilities, public transit, gatherings that require a permit, places of worship, financial institutions, parking areas and similar areas connected to those places, and the new default rule as to private property.”
The ruling reverses a preliminary injunction as it applied to “bars and restaurants that serve alcohol, playgrounds, youth centers, parks, athletic areas, athletic facilities, most real property under the control of the Department of Parks and Recreation or Department of Fish and Wildlife, casinos and similar gambling establishments, stadiums, arenas, public libraries, amusement parks, zoos, and museums; parking areas and similar areas connected to those places; and all parking areas connected to other sensitive places listed in the statute.”
Upon hearing the news about the court ruling, SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut said in a statement to the media, “We are pleased that the 9th Circuit has affirmed part of the lower court’s injunction. However, we maintain that the areas as to which the Court reversed the injunction, and reinstated the carry ban, violate the Second Amendment. The State’s expansion of so called ‘sensitive places’ goes beyond what the Supreme Court contemplated when it mentioned them in Bruen and are designed to discourage individuals from bearing arms in public. SAF and its partners will continue to aggressively litigate this case to ensure Californians may exercise their Second Amendment rights in full.”
SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb said, “We’re delighted the appeals court panel upheld the district court’s judgment that we are likely to succeed in our challenge of the prohibition on public transportation. Winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time is an ongoing process, and each step takes us closer to victory.”
SAF is joined in this case by Gun Owners of America, the Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of California, the California Rifle & Pistol Association, the Liberal Gun Owners Association and several private citizens including Reno May, for whom the case is named.
The case was consolidated with two other cases, one involving Hawaii’s “sensitive areas” law, known as Wolford v. Lopez, for which the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms submitted an amicus brief. CCRKBA was joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, FPC Action Foundation, California Gun Rights Foundation, the Center for Human Liberty and Dr. Angus Kirk McClellan, former college professor and historian.
The brief offered specific examples of “sensitive areas” in several states, with the common thread among them being the government’s provision of armed security at such locations. The Hawaii law, however, essentially prohibits legal firearms carry in a variety of locations including parks and ocean beaches.
“The State’s bans encompass a broad swath of locations that ordinary individuals visit on a routine basis,” the brief noted. “Most important, these locations lack ubiquitous state-provided security in any way comparable to armed security in contained locations.”
