Thursday afternoon, California’s 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling in the case of Peruta v. San Diego County, which upheld the right of the San Diego County sheriff to withhold concealed carry permits from those who could not demonstrate “good cause” for having one. The “good cause” provision, a subjective discretion made by local sheriffs, effectively allows certain jurisdictions to get rid of CCW altogether.
A three-judge appellate court of the 9th Circuit had previously reversed the ruling of the district court in February 2014, arguing that the Second Amendment did indeed protect the right of citizens to carry outside the home. Today’s ruling by the court, sitting en banc, took on a decidedly different tone, stating flatly in its decision “we hold that the Second Amendment does not preserve or protect a right of a member of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public.” The court also found “self-protection and protection of family (without credible threats of violence)” to be an “invalid reason” to request a CCW permit.
Based out of San Francisco, the 9th Circuit has a reputation for progressive activist decisions that often do not hold up to Constitutional scrutiny. The American Bar Association found that 80% of the 9th Circuit’s rulings that were reviewed by the Court were either reversed or vacated. If the precedents of Heller v. District of Columbia and McDonald v. Chicago tell us anything, it’s that this newest ruling from the 9th Circuit will hopefully find its way to the Court’s garbage bin as well.
But I think I speak for all conservatives when I say that I would feel a lot better if Justice Scalia were sitting up there.