A procedural decision in a landmark Second Amendment case could spell the end for California laws restricting the issuance of permits to carry concealed handguns, FoxNews.com reported on Nov. 12.
The decision by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals would bar other law enforcement officials, including state Attorney General Kamala Harris, from gaining “intervener status” to join in further challenges of its ruling in a case originally brought by Edward Peruta, an independent journalist, who sued the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department over its policy of requiring a specific reason for being allowed to carry a concealed weapon in public.
San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore has said he will not fight the ruling, meaning there is no one with standing left to challenge the decision made in February.
In its bombshell and potentially precedent-setting ruling earlier this year, the 9th Circuit found those policies requiring a specific reason for being allowed to carry a concealed weapon in public to be unconstitutional and held that law-abiding citizens have a right to bear arms under the Constitution’s Second Amendment and could not be required to justify their reasons for carrying concealed weapons.
The panel simultaneously ruled on a similar case brought in Yolo County, and that county’s sheriff, Edward Prieto, has not indicated he will drop further appeals, which could be heard en banc by all of the 9th Circuit judges or by the US Supreme Court. Harris could try to join Prieto’s case, although the latest ruling by the court’s three-judge panel appears to make it unlikely she would be allowed.
California counties have differed on policy in the wake of the February decision, with Orange County issuing the permits on request and others waiting for a resolution in the case.
One judge on the panel disagreed with the no intervener ruling, saying the state should be able to intervene in the case to “present an argument on an important constitutional question affecting millions of citizens.”
