California’s Open Carry Ban Ruled Unconstitutional: What You Need to Know

By Derrick R. Stallings – Huntingofficer.com

In a major legal shift, a federal appeals panel recently ruled that California’s long-standing ban on “open carry”—the practice of visibly carrying a firearm in public—is unconstitutional in the state’s most populated areas.

​The decision, handed down on January 2, 2026, by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, has sparked a heated debate between gun rights advocates and public safety supporters. Here is a breakdown of what this ruling means, why it happened, and the different perspectives surrounding it.

​What is “Open Carry”?

​To understand the ruling, we first need to define the terms. In the world of firearm laws, there are two primary ways people carry guns in public:

• ​Concealed Carry: The firearm is hidden from view (e.g., under a jacket or in a pocket). In California, this usually requires a specific permit (CCW).
• ​Open Carry: The firearm is visible to anyone around, often carried in a holster on the hip or slung over the shoulder.

​Before this ruling, California law largely banned open carry in counties with more than 200,000 people—areas where roughly 95% of the state’s population lives. In smaller, rural counties, open carry was allowed only with a permit.

​Why did the Court strike down the ban?

​The lawsuit, Baird v. Bonta, was filed by Mark Baird, a resident who argued that the state was infringing on his Second Amendment rights. The appeals panel agreed, citing a 2-1 decision based on a 2022 Supreme Court case (NYSRPA v. Bruen).

​The judges argued that:

1. ​Historical Tradition: Under current legal standards, gun laws must be consistent with the “historical tradition” of the U.S. The judges found that open carry was a common and protected practice when the Bill of Rights was written.
2. ​Urban vs. Rural: The panel ruled that the state cannot completely ban open carry in urban areas just because they are more crowded. They called the ban a “de facto” (effectively total) prohibition for the vast majority of Californians.

​Different Sides of the Debate

​This topic is deeply polarizing, with both sides raising valid concerns about rights and safety.

​The Argument for Open Carry

• ​Constitutional Rights: Proponents believe the Second Amendment clearly protects the right to “bear arms” openly, and that states shouldn’t be able to “hide” or “restrict” this right behind complicated permit processes.
• ​Self-Defense: Supporters argue that a visible firearm can act as a deterrent to would-be criminals.
• ​Ease of Access: For some, open carry is more comfortable or practical than concealed carry, which requires specific clothing to keep the weapon hidden.

​The Argument Against Open Carry

• ​Public Anxiety: Many people feel uncomfortable or threatened when they see a firearm in a public space like a grocery store or park. Critics argue this “intimidation factor” hurts community well-being.
• ​Law Enforcement Safety: Police groups often oppose open carry because it makes it difficult for officers to distinguish between a law-abiding citizen and a potential threat during a chaotic situation.
• ​Increased Violence: Opponents point to studies suggesting that more guns in public can lead to higher rates of accidental shootings or escalated confrontations. Governor Gavin Newsom’s office criticized the ruling, suggesting it returns the state to the “days of the Wild West.”

​What Happens Next?

​This isn’t necessarily the final word. The State of California is expected to ask for an “en banc” review, which means a larger panel of 11 judges from the 9th Circuit would re-hear the case and could potentially overturn this decision. For now, the ruling represents a significant victory for gun rights groups and a major challenge to California’s strict firearm regulations.