Defending California’s sensitive places and private-property restrictions.
Court: Ninth Circuit
Issue at Stake: Sensitive places
Summary: May v. Bonta and Carralero v. Bonta involve Second Amendment challenges to California’s law that (1) restricts carrying firearms at designated sensitive places, such as state and local parks, playgrounds and youth centers, bars, and houses of worship; and (2) prohibits carrying firearms onto others’ private property without permission.
Everytown filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit, arguing that California’s restrictions are constitutional under the approach to Second Amendment cases set out in New York Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen. First, the brief argues that the court should center its historical analysis on 1868 as opposed to 1791, and should also consider earlier and later laws. Second, the brief urges the court against dismissing the state’s historical analogues as insufficiently “representative,” because even a small number of laws or laws covering small populations can be sufficient to establish a tradition of firearm regulation under Bruen. Third, the brief explains that the court should consider the historical context within which states and localities chose to legislate (or not to legislate) when evaluating the historical record.
Decision: This case was argued before the Ninth Circuit on April 11, 2024 and is pending decision.
Case Documents
Join
