9th Circuit rules against ban on open carry of firearms in most California counties

The coverage tends to treat open carry as a niche cultural fight, as if the only question is whether California feels comfortable with visible firearms. That framing dodges the harder issue: when a state broadly bans a constitutional right, courts are supposed to ask whether the government has real historical and legal grounding, not whether the policy polls well.

California’s approach often starts from the premise that ordinary citizens are the problem and that officials should decide who “needs” self-defense. That erodes equal rights under the law and turns a basic liberty into a privilege granted county by county.

A serious debate should weigh public trust, rule of law, and fairness to law-abiding people, while targeting actual criminal misuse. If the state wants limits, it should meet a clear constitutional standard, not stretch definitions until rights disappear in practice.

The principle at stake is constitutional carry rights that apply consistently, even when a powerful state would rather manage them out of existence.