We’ve been covering quite extensively all of the temper tantrums that the progressives have been having lately. The NYSRPA v. Bruen decision was a kryptonite to the gun rights oppressors across the land. Much to the chagrin of the Democratic nannies in control in a few strongholds, the peasants are allowed to have their pitchforks. Writer and friend over on the left coast, Joe Drammissi, penned a succinct but informative update on where the current conflicts are with Bruen response laws. He brings us the information through the lens of California’s SB2.
Appropriately titled, “SB2 and the Attempted Assassination of Concealed Carry,” Drammissi sets the stage through sobering facts he’s said before. It’s not like we’re not all out here banging this same drum, because we are, it’s just that Drammissi, like me, comes from a liberal wasteland of progressive failures.
“It doesn’t always seem so, but America in general is very pro-Second Amendment (2A),” Drammissi opened with. “As we no longer, for the most part, have a free press populated with investigative journalists but rather have what amounts to a propaganda arm for the Democrat party, the reporting on this subject has a very strong anti-2A bias.”
This is why it’s so important to seek out independent media, such as the Town Hall group of publications. And, find trustworthy writers and media personalities like Drammissi.
One of the inconvenient truths – to the anti-gunners – is that more than 50% of the Union is permitless when it comes to carry rights. “The reality is that of the 50 states, probably 42 or 43 of them are reasonably fair and supportive of the Second Amendment and the rights it protects,” Drammissi observes. “Of the 50 states, 29 are currently constitutional carry states, a number likely to grow in the coming years, where no permit is required for a citizen to exercise his or her right to carry a concealed firearm for personal protection.”
Looking at the Bruen response states is looking at the states to which Bruen was addressing in the first place. The same 7 or 8 states that were not playing ball with carry rights prior to Bruen, aren’t really playing ball now either – with some limited exceptions.
Drammissi gives a state of affairs on SB2 out of California and a rundown on some of the other high-profile chief infringers.
California and some of the other backward, oppressive states reacted by passing “sensitive area” legislation of which SB2 is an example. These laws essentially say that it is legal for a CCW holder to carry a concealed handgun anywhere that is not designated as a sensitive area. SB2 and other legislation like it simply declare everywhere to be a sensitive area essentially eliminating concealed carry. Examples of SB2 defined sensitive areas include any business, church, bank, hospital, park, all public transportation, airport property, and parking lots adjacent to any of those areas. The full list is much longer.
Five states are currently attempting to implement sensitive area type laws. All of these laws are being challenged in court. All of these laws will eventually be struck down as they are unconstitutional and in direct conflict with the Bruen decision. What follows is a summary of the current status of each of these court challenges.
California – May v. Bonta, Carralero v. Bonta
The plaintiffs were granted an injunction for the sensitive area portion of SB2 (in addition to sensitive areas, SB2 contains other gun-control provisions not under injunction) preventing that portion of the legislation from being implemented. The 9th Circuit stayed the injunction allowing the law to go into effect briefly but then dissolved the stay. Currently the sensitive areas portion of SB2 is not in effect while the 9th Circuit, which heard oral arguments in the case in April, deliberates. A ruling is expected in the coming months.
Hawaii – Wolford v. Lopez
Similar to SB2, the Hawaii sensitive area law is being challenged in court. The U.S. District Court of Hawaii granted a temporary restraining order preventing the law from being implemented and the 9th Circuit declined to stay the order. Oral arguments were also heard by the 9th Circuit in April, and a decision is expected in the coming months.
New York – Antonyuk v. Hochul
The New York version of SB2 was challenged in the U.S. District Court Northern District of New York where a judge ruled mostly in favor of the plaintiffs. In December the 2nd Circuit upheld most of the law where upon the plaintiffs filed a petition of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court (in other words they asked the Supreme Court to rule on the case) and are waiting on word from SCOTUS.
New Jersey – Koons [and Siegel] v. Platkin
Same story with the New Jersey version where a judge from the U.S. District Court District of New Jersey ruled mostly in favor of the plaintiffs and the ruling was appealed by the State. The appellate court heard oral arguments in October of 2023 and the plaintiffs are still waiting for a ruling.
Maryland Shall Issue v. Montgomery County
The Maryland sensitive area law was challenged, and the case heard by the U.S. District Court District of Maryland where the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction was denied. The appeal is pending.
What I love most about Drammissi in this piece came next. “These laws will eventually be overturned as unconstitutional,” Drammissi states. However, his optimism is not to be taken as a sign he’s out to lunch. He continued, “but depending on the courts to correct the abuses of politicians is time-consuming, expensive, and the outcome uncertain at best.” Drammissi nails it 100%. He’s hopeful, but a realist.
Absent from Drammissi’s list is the fight that’s going on in Massachusetts. All of the states that made his dishonor roll are all entangled in active litigation with already enacted Bruen response laws.
In short, everything is in waiting. We’re waiting on rulings and we’re waiting on certiorari.
What’s going on in these five states is an outlier. Most of the rest of the country has their you-know-what in order. Leave is to New York, New Jersey, and California to be the Harry, Hermione, and Ron of the anti-liberty movement – always with their fingerprints on the most active and recent kerfuffle. Except while these three states are carrying the banner for the progressive tag-alongs, Hawaii and Maryland, they’re not going to be lauded as heroes like our three wizarding friends.
In closing out, Drammissi tells his readers about the most effective strategy we’ve got. “The only winning strategy is to elect leaders that respect the Constitution and who will uphold the rights protected within and defend the freedom and liberty of all Americans,” Drammissi said. “November is fast approaching offering Americans their next opportunity to choose their leaders and the differences between the two sides could not be more stark, the choice could not be more clear.”
Drammissi is a firearms instructor and writer out on the left coast. Be sure to check out his post in full, this commentary only does it limited justice.
