A federal appeals court has ruled that California’s ban on openly carrying firearms in counties with populations greater than 200,000 is unconstitutional, striking down a law that affected approximately 95% of the state’s population. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 decision on January 2, 2026, finding that the ban violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
The majority opinion, authored by U.S. Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke and joined by Judge Kenneth Lee—both appointees of President Donald Trump—held that open carry is deeply rooted in the nation’s historical tradition and was clearly protected at the time of the Founding and the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court determined that California’s urban open-carry ban fails under the legal test established by the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), which requires gun regulations to be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
VanDyke emphasized that there is no historical record of laws restricting open carry at the nation’s founding and criticized California’s justification based on modern concerns like public panic, stating that such challenges have existed throughout American history. He also noted that more than 30 states currently allow open carry, and California was the only state in the Ninth Circuit to impose such a sweeping restriction.
The case was brought by Mark Baird, a Siskiyou County resident, who challenged both the open-carry ban and licensing requirements in rural counties. While the court invalidated the ban in populous counties, it upheld California’s existing licensing regime for open carry in counties with fewer than 200,000 residents, ruling that Baird had waived certain arguments regarding those requirements.
In dissent, Senior Circuit Judge N. Randy Smith, appointed by President George W. Bush, argued that because California allows concealed carry, it may constitutionally restrict open carry to protect public safety. Governor Gavin Newsom indicated the state is likely to appeal the decision, suggesting it will seek either an en banc review by the full Ninth Circuit or further legal action.
The ruling follows a broader trend of courts reevaluating gun laws in light of the Bruen decision, which has led to the invalidation of various firearm restrictions across the country. Legal experts anticipate further litigation, noting this may not be the final word on the matter