9th Circuit SHOCKS Everyone! California Open Carry Ban Ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL | Baird v. Bonta

Added: 2026-05-30

[00:00:00]A massive Second Amendment bombshell just dropped at the Ninth Circuit. And if you live in California, or honestly anywhere in the Western United States, this changes everything you thought you knew about open carry. For the first time in nearly 60 years, a federal appeals court just told California that its ban on openly carrying a handgun in public is flatout unconstitutional.

[00:00:20]Yes, you heard that right. The Ninth Circuit, the same court that gun owners have called the most anti-gun court in America for decades, just sided with the Second Amendment in a case called Baird versus Bont. Before we dive into the details, do me one quick favor. Hit that subscribe button right now. And and I mean right now. Because here is the truth nobody wants to admit. Most gun owners find out about huge legal rulings like this weeks or even months after they happen. By then, they have already missed the window to understand their rights, their risks, and what they need to do to stay out of trouble. I do not want that to be you. So, tap subscribe, turn on the bell, and let us get into it. All right, here's what just happened, and you need to hear it in plain English. On January 2nd, 2026, a three-judge panel at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a ruling in Baird versus Bont. The decision struck down California's near total ban on openly carrying a handgun in any county with a population over 200,000 people.

[00:01:13]Now, that might sound like a small group of counties, but here's the crazy part.

[00:01:17]That covers about 95% of every single person living in California. So we're talking about Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Orange County, San Jose, basically every place anyone actually lives. For almost 60 years, going all the way back to 1967, California has banned regular citizens from carrying a visible handgun in public in those urban counties. There was no license you could get. There was no permit you could apply for. It was just a flat no. If you wanted to carry, your only option was a concealed carry permit. And good luck getting one of those in places like Los Angeles County, where they have been notoriously hard to obtain for decades. So for almost six decades, if you lived in any major California city, openly carrying a handgun was a crime. Period. Then along comes Mark Baird. He is a regular guy from Syscue County in rural Northern California. He sued the state arguing that the open carry ban violated his rights under the Second Amendment. The case went up through the federal courts, eventually landing at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. And here is where it gets really interesting. The court did not just rule in his favor. They wrote a powerful scholarly opinion that pulled apart California's arguments piece by piece using the Supreme Court's test from a 2022 case called Breuan. Let me explain Breuan real quick because you need to understand it. The Brewan case said that gun laws today have to match historical traditions from around the time the Second Amendment was written, which was 1791, and around when the 14th amendment was adopted, which was 1868.

[00:02:43]If the government cannot point to a real similar law from those time periods that did the same thing for the same reason, then the modern gun law is unconstitutional. Simple as that. No more judges balancing public safety against your rights. It is now a pure history test. So when California tried to defend its open carry ban, they had to find old laws from the founding era that banned open carry in public. And guess what? They could not. The Ninth Circuit looked at the history and basically said, "The open carry of firearms is part of this nation's history and tradition. It was protected when the Bill of Rights was adopted, and it was protected when the 14th Amendment was adopted." California could not produce a single solid historical example of a state banning regular citizens from openly carrying a handgun for self-defense. Now, quick question before we go further. Are you subscribed yet? Because what I am about to break down in the next section could literally affect whether you accidentally become a felon in California. Hit that subscribe button now, and I will keep these critical updates coming to you the moment they happen. So, here's the second thing you need to understand, and this is where most YouTubers are getting it completely wrong. They are out there telling you that open carry is now legal in California. They are telling people to grab their pistol, put it on their hip, and walk down Hollywood Boulevard.

[00:03:56]Do not do that. I repeat, do not do that. You will get arrested. You might even get shot. Let me explain why. When a court strikes down a law, the ruling does not automatically go into effect the second the judge bangs the gavvel.

[00:04:10]There is a process. First, the losing side, in this case, the California Attorney General Rob Bont gets to ask for what is called a stay. A stay is basically a pause button. It tells the world, "Hey, do not change anything yet.

[00:04:23]We are going to appeal this." And that is exactly what California did. Within days of the ruling, Attorney General Bont filed a petition for what is called rehering on bonk. Let me break that down for you. On bonk is a French term that means on the bench. In the federal court system, when a case is decided by a three judge panel, the losing side can ask for the entire court or in the Ninth Circuit's case, a larger group of 11 judges to rehear the case. And here's the painful truth that every second amendment lawyer knows by heart. The Ninth Circuit is infamous. absolutely infamous for overturning proun rulings when they go on bonk. It has happened over and over and over again for decades. Some lawyers call it the Ninth Circuit two-step. A three judge panel protects the second amendment and then the full court tears it down a year later. So even though the panel ruled in favor of open carry, that ruling is currently frozen in time. The mandate, which is the formal order that actually makes the ruling take effect on the ground, has not been issued. And until that mandate is issued, the old ban is still being enforced. Law enforcement has been told to keep arresting people for open carry. Prosecutors are still filing charges. If you walk into a Starbucks in Los Angeles with a visible Glock on your hip right now, you are going to jail. The unconstitutional law is still being treated as the law of the land because the courts have hit pause.

[00:05:39]This is the part nobody is talking about in their excited reaction videos. The law in California on the ground today is exactly the same as it was before the ruling. You cannot openly carry. You'll be arrested. you will be prosecuted. The only thing that has changed is that there is now a court opinion saying the ban is unconstitutional, but that opinion is not enforceable yet. It is like winning a lottery ticket, but the state will not let you cash it in. Now, quick legal note. This is educational information, not legal advice. Every situation is different, and gun laws change fast. Always talk to a qualified attorney in your state before you make any decisions about how you carry or transport a firearm. I am giving you the big picture, but your specific situation needs a real lawyer. Here's the third thing, and this is where the ruling gets really powerful. Because the judges did not just say California lost. They went further. The court explicitly rejected California's main argument, which was that since concealed carry is technically available, the state can ban open carry. The judges said, "No, that is not how the Second Amendment works.

[00:06:39]Open carry and concealed carry are not the same thing. They're not interchangeable. The state cannot ban one form of carrying a firearm just because they allow the other. This is huge because it creates what lawyers call a circuit split. The second circuit, which covers New York, recently ruled the opposite way in a case called Frey versus City of New York. They said New York could ban open carry as long as concealed carry was allowed. Now, the Ninth Circuit has ruled the exact opposite. When two federal appeals courts disagree on a major constitutional question, that is exactly the kind of situation the Supreme Court loves to step into. So even if California wins the onbon rehearing, this case could end up going all the way to the Supreme Court, which could settle the question for the entire country once and for all. Hey, real quick. About 73% of people watching right now are not subscribed to this channel. Do not be in that group. Join the gun owners who get these updates first before the mainstream media spins them and before the lawyers can give you a watered down version. Click subscribe, hit the bell, and let us keep going. All right, the fourth thing you need to understand is the fascinating concurrence written by Judge Kenneth Lee. This is where the court basically called California out for playing dirty. See, the panel only struck down the ban in the populous counties. There is still a separate law that says in rural counties under 200,000 people, you can get an open carry license from your local sheriff or police chief. It is what they call a shall issue system, meaning if you meet the requirements, they have to give you the license. Sounds great, right? Well, here's the catch. Judge Lee pointed out that California has never, not even one single time, issued an open carry license under that law. Not one. They have had this law on the books for years. They have managed to issue exactly zero permits. How? Because the application form they use is a 17page concealed carry weapons form. It does not even mention open carry anywhere on the document. So, if you walk into a sheriff's office and ask for an open carry license, you get handed a CCW form that has nothing to do with what you're asking for. Judge Lee said. and I am paraphrasing here, constitutional rights should not depend on a where's Waldo quiz. He pointed out that California regularly sues private companies for engaging in this exact kind of deceptive behavior, but the state does it every single day to its own citizens trying to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

[00:08:52]This is the part that should make every gun owner furious. The state has been pretending to follow the Constitution while quietly making sure no one could actually use the rights they were supposedly protected by. and the court called them out on it in a published opinion. That is going to have ripple effects beyond just this case. It signals to other anti-gun states that the courts are watching and they are not going to fall for these little bureaucratic tricks anymore. The fifth thing you need to know is what happens next. And this is where the timeline gets critical. California has filed for onbunk reharing. That means the Ninth Circuit will decide whether to have a larger group of judges look at the case again. If they say yes, the original ruling gets thrown out and we start over with a bigger panel. That process could take a year, maybe even longer. During all of that time, the ban stays in effect. If the onbank court reverses the panel, which is honestly what most legal experts expect to happen given the Ninth Circuit's history, then the only path left is the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court takes very few cases. But with a clear circuit split between the Ninth Circuit and the Second Circuit, this case has a much higher chance of being picked up than most. We could be looking at a Supreme Court ruling on open carry within the next two to three years. And that ruling would apply to every state in the country. So, what should you actually do right now? First, do not openly carry in California. I cannot say that enough. The ruling is frozen.

[00:10:08]Police are still arresting people. You will end up with a felony on your record and that will follow you for the rest of your life. Second, if you have a concealed carry permit, keep using it the way you always have. Nothing about CCW has changed. Third, pay attention to what the inbank court decides. That decision will determine whether you ever see open carry actually become legal in California. And fourth, if you live in another state that bans open carry, like New York, Florida, or South Carolina, this ruling could eventually affect your state, too, if the Supreme Court takes it up. Here's the urgency you need to understand. This case is moving fast.

[00:10:42]The onbunk petition has already been filed. The court could rule on whether to take the case up in just a few months. And every single development matters because each one shifts the legal landscape. Subscribe right now because the next update on this case could literally come any day and you need to know about it the moment it happens. Do not wait until you read about it in a headline 3 weeks later.

[00:11:01]Get it from me first. So, let me wrap this up for you with a clear summary.

[00:11:05]The 9th Circuit just ruled that California's open carry ban is unconstitutional. That is a massive second amendment victory on paper, but the ruling is frozen pending appeal, which means you still cannot openly carry in California today without getting arrested. The case will likely go on bank, where it could be reversed, and from there it could go all the way to the Supreme Court, where it could change open carry law across the entire country. The takeaway is simple.

[00:11:30]Celebrate the win, but do not act on it yet. Stay informed, stay patient, and stay legal. The worst thing you can do is jump the gun, no pun intended, and end up as the test case that nobody wanted to be. Hit that subscribe button right now so you do not miss the next critical update. Drop a comment below telling me what you think will happen at the OnBonquery hearing. I read every single one, and I want to hear your take. As always, this video is for educational andformational purposes only. It is not legal advice. Gun laws are complicated and they vary by state and even by city. Always consult with a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before making any decisions about carrying a firearm.