San Diego CANNOT Require Residents to Show “Good Cause” for Concealed Carry Permit

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, otherwise known as the Ninth Circus has ruled that San Diego cannot require residents to show “good cause” before obtaining a concealed carry permit.


The court ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is, in and of itself, a sufficient cause for bearing arms for self-defense. Moreover, it is a sufficient cause both inside and outside of one’s domicile.

According to SFGate, Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain’s majority opinion emphasized “the right to bear arms includes the right to carry an operable arm outside the home for the lawful purpose of self-defense.”

He said the Second Amendment must be read as including “the right to carry weapons outside the home” because “the risk of armed confrontation” is in no way limited to one’s home. He supported his points by citing the examples of “a woman toting a small handgun in her purse as she walks through a dangerous neighborhood or a night-shift worker carrying a handgun in his coat as he travels to and from his job site.” Read more at Breitbart

Here’s the take from the LA Times:

In a 2-1 ruling, a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned San Diego County permit requirements because the court said they denied responsible, law-abiding citizens the right to carry concealed handguns in public for self-defense.

California generally prohibits carrying guns, whether loaded or not, in public locations.

But residents may apply for a license to carry a concealed weapon in the city or county where they live or work. To obtain licenses in San Diego County, residents must show “good moral character,” complete a training course and establish they have valid reasons for needing the gun.

The court said San Diego’s policy was too restrictive under the 2nd Amendment because it required applicants to show a specific concern for personal safety.

“Given this requirement, the ‘typical’ responsible, law-abiding citizen in San Diego County cannot bear arms in public for self-defense,” wrote Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain, an appointee of President Reagan. He was joined by Judge Consuelo Callahan, an appointee of President George W. Bush.

In a dissent, Judge Sidney Thomas, a President Clinton appointee, said the majority ruling “upends the entire California firearm regulatory scheme.”

The Volokh Conspiracy goes in-depth. Read it here.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is based in San Francisco, and has long been considered the most Liberal court and the most reversed, but the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has taken that lead with an 81 percent reversal. Can you imagine having 81 percent of your work deemed unworthy by the highest court in the land? These people get paid!

If you would like to receive Maggie’s Notebook daily posts direct to your inbox, no ads, no spam, EVER, enter your email address in the box below.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 957 other subscribers


  • It’s about time someone with some common sense ruled in favor of the 2nd Amendment. I mean, seriously. It is not that difficult to understand what those few words mean.

  • Fixall

    “shall not infringe” Need I say more?

  • Geo

    A unbelievable ruling coming from the 9th Circus. There is some division between different Courts over this. No doubt it’s heading to the Supremes who’s last ruling was the Heller decision. Should be interesting, with the current Justices it should be upheld.

  • nbamron

    Only upended until that fifth Supreme Court Justice from the far left takes its seat on the Court.

  • KatieNorcross

    You know you have gone too far when the most Liberal court in the nation comes down against you.

  • Hey Judge Sidney Thomas, GOOD!

  • Richard Mooney

    ” the majority ruling ”upends the entire California firearm regulatory scheme.”

    Yes, a scheme, a con job. definitely that.