Right-to-Carry Progress in California

The Calguns Foundation and the Second Amendment Foundation have dropped their case against Sacramento County, now that Sheriff John McGinness is effectively issuing concealed-handgun licenses for the “good cause” of self-defense. Sykes v. McGinness will now continue as Richards v. Prieto in Yolo County, where a constitutional showdown may yet be required. However, for now at least, the civil-rights skirmish in Sacramento is over.

Coupled with the CGF’s recently announced concealed-carry compliance and sunshine initiative, the victory in Sacramento illustrates how right-to-carry reform will proceed in California. With support from a broad base of volunteers in every county and bolstered by the public disclosure of acceptable “good cause,” a series of civil-rights lawsuits will challenge unequal and/or unconstitutional licensing practices until all of the counties have reformed or until the question of constitutionality is settled in federal court. Should the constitutional issue be settled elsewhere in the meantime, a network for implementing compliance in California will already be in place.

“Good Cause” Challenged in New York

While waiting for California’s own right-to-carry challenge to move forward, lead counsel Alan Gura has filed a similar case in that other bastion of gun control, New York. Like our own Sykes v. McGinness, the new complaint challenges the constitutionality of “good cause” requirements for the issuance of handgun permits. Since the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that we have a fundamental right to keep and bear arms, Mr. Gura writes in Kachalsky v. Cacace that “[i]ndividuals cannot be required to prove their ‘good cause’ for the exercise of fundamental constitutional rights” and “cannot be required to demonstrate any unique, heightened need for self-defense apart from the general public in order to exercise the right to keep and bear arms.”

“Good cause” requirements violate the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Fighting for the Right to Arms in California

Scarcely two weeks have passed since the historic ruling in Nordyke v. King incorporated the Second Amendment in California, but unconstitutional gun-control laws and regulations are already being challenged. The Second Amendment Foundation and the Calguns Foundation have filed two lawsuits in federal court. Peña, et al. v. Cid attacks California’s roster of approved handguns as a de facto ban on common defensive weapons, while Sykes, et al. v. McGinness, et al. challenges the outdated and arbitrary application of the state’s discretionary handgun-licensing system.

The constitutional questions raised in both cases were addressed by last year’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling in D.C. v. Heller, so positive outcomes seem likely. The real question may only be how long it takes for the litigation to be resolved. I don’t expect victory to take more than 10 years, but it could come much more quickly than that.

It has been suggested that the right-to-arms movement in California has allies in high places. I have to wonder if these lawsuits wouldn’t provide the political cover for such allies to issue new, more reasonable interpretations of our current laws … in light of Second Amendment incorporation. Why not spare the state, counties, and municipalities from costly litigation?