Federal Lawsuit to Overturn California's 1967 Ban on Loaded Open Carry
I have a Federal lawsuit seeking to overturn California's 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry. My website -> California Right To Carry
Originally Posted by nicklikesHK
My lawsuit is opposed by all of the so called gun-rights groups which think that somehow a ban on Loaded Open Carry means that the Federal Courts will make California "shall issue" when it comes to concealed carry permits. There is no precedent to support that argument anywhere on any topic, let alone one involving the Second Amendment. Courts will go out of there way to avoid a constitutional question. No Federal judge is going to invent a new form of jurisprudence just to please the NRA/CRPA/SAF/CalGuns.
The NRA/CRPA and SAF/CalGuns both brought Federal separate lawsuits seeking shall-issue concealed carry permits in California and lost in Federal District Court. Both cases are now on appeal before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Net lawyers should take note that the NRA/CRPA lawsuit explicitly failed to challenge ANY California statute. Their argument is that the 9th should make concealed carry shall issue in order to prevent the overturning of California's ban on Loaded Open Carry as well as the California Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995. The NRA/CRPA opening brief to the 9th says that would be "drastic."
Something to keep in mind the next time the NRA/CRPA asks for money to fight California's Open Carry bans.
Likewise, the SAF/CalGuns attorney (Alan Gura) spent so much time arguing that the US Supreme Court really didn't mean what it said in Heller about longstanding prohibitions on concealed carry and that California can ban Open Carry if it wants to, he forgot to state exactly what (if any) constitutional challenge he was bringing. The Federal District Court judge inferred a "Facial Challenge" and ruled against Gura. Facial challenges are almost impossible to win and since Gura did not raise what is known as an "As Applied" challenge at the trial court, he can't raise it at the Appellate Court.
Gura's defenders say that is all part of his strategy. To win by losing. In the four years since the Heller decision the US Supreme Court has not heard a single case involving concealed carry, nor will they.
Gene Hoffman, the Chairman of CalGuns, has been the most vocal critic of Open Carry in the State of California.
My Federal lawsuit, on the other hand, is arguing that the US Supreme Court meant exactly what it said in both the Heller and McDonald decisions. I seek to overturn California's ban on openly carrying a loaded firearm and California's law against carrying a loaded firearm (openly or concealed) while travelling.
Given that I have three US Supreme Court precedents and California Supreme Court precedents going back to 1891 saying that Open Carry is the lawful manner of carrying a firearm in public, I'm fairly confident of winning my case on Appeal when it reaches the 9th (stare decisis).
The best that the NRA/CRPA/SAF/CalGuns can hope for is a remand back to the District courts for a do-over.