'Dangerous Decision': CA Gun Laws Vulnerable With Supreme Court Ruling

CALIFORNIA — The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday threw out a New York law that restricted the right of citizens to carry a concealed weapon in public. The move suggested that California's strict gun laws could be targeted next.

The 6-3 decision, celebrated by gun rights activists, found that New York's restrictions violated the Second Amendment. The ruling had been largely expected since the majority-conservative court heard arguments in November, with most justices appearing skeptical of the state's century-old law.

The law forced people seeking to carry a gun outside their home to go through an extensive review process that required them to prove they had an extra need to do so.

Following the move, California's similar law became vulnerable.

"This is a dangerous decision from a court hell bent on pushing a radical ideological agenda and infringing on the rights of states to protect our citizens from being gunned down in our streets, schools, and churches," California Gov. Gavin Newsom said on social media Thursday morning.

Newsom condemned the ruling as shameful and said it was "a dark day in America."

Keeping firearms only at home for self defense "would make little sense," Justice Clarence Thomas said, writing for the court’s majority.

The court’s ruling will likely affect California’s strict permitting laws, said California’s attorney general and gun owners’ rights organizations.

Attorney General Rob Bonta told California law enforcement agencies in a letter earlier this month that "given California’s similar, ‘good cause’ standard, the decision may impact California laws regarding the carrying of firearms in public places." He said many aspects of California’s law might remain untouched, despite the ruling.

In California, the ease of obtaining a concealed weapon permit depends which county or city a person lives in. That’s because such licenses are issued by county sheriffs or city police chiefs. State law requires applicants to demonstrate "good cause," but that cause is at the discretion of local law enforcement officials, CalMatters reported.

Nearly two-thirds of California’s 58 counties already eased their standards for granting concealed weapons permits after a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the state’s concealed carry standard in 2014, said attorney Chuck Michel, president of the California Rifle and Pistol Association.

The court kept the more permissive standard even after a larger appellate panel reversed the decision two years later, said Michel, who wrote a book on California’s strict gun laws.

Gun rights advocates said the Supreme Court overturning the New York law meant California must join the 43 states that have what are considered “shall issue” standards. Those generally require officials to issue permits unless there is some reason that an individual should be denied.

In the Golden State, 37 counties already grant permits if an applicant requests it for self defense. That effectively makes them “shall issue” counties, advocates said.

The remaining 21 counties have tighter standards, requiring, for example, that applicants demonstrate that they have business-related or professional risks that justify their being armed.

The Supreme Court decision "not only affirms that laws prohibiting licensed public concealed carry of firearms for self-defense violates the Constitution, but also that courts have been applying the wrong approach to evaluating the constitutionality of gun control laws,” Michel said.

Michel’s organization planned to immediately send the 21 counties legal notices that they must ease their standards in light of the Supreme Court’s decision. He also planned to ask the 9th Circuit to rule on his latest legal challenge to California’s “good cause” standard, a decision that has been on hold awaiting the U. S. Supreme Court’s decision in the New York case.

Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California, said his organization expected quickly to sue California to force it to adopt the standard set in the New York decision, and to sue local jurisdictions if they don’t adopt the high court’s ruling.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.