Ninth Circuit strikes down California restriction on bearing arms


Orange County Breeze:

**Ninth Circuit strikes down California restriction on bearing arms

In its opinion in Edward Peruta v. County of San Diego, 10-56971 published on Thursday, Feb. 13, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals relied on historical analysis and legal precedent to overturn a lower court ruling and declare unconstitutional California’s restriction on the right of an individual to keep and bear arms.
The San Diego regulation specifically required individuals to apply for a permit to carry, and required a good reason for the permit to be issued. Further, a general desire to be ready to defend oneself was not acceptable as a a good reason.
The appeal came from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. Chief District Judge Irma E. Gonzalez presided.

The three-member panel for the Ninth Circuit consisted of Diarmuid Fionntain O’Scannlain, Sidney R. Thomas, and Consuelo Maria Callahan.
According to Judge O’Scannlain: “We are called upon to decide whether a responsible, law-abiding citizen has a right under the Second Amendment to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.”
After lengthy historical analysis to understand the scope of the original right as captured in the Second Amendment, the Ninth Circuit opinion states on page 48, “Put simply, a law that destroys (rather than merely burdens) a right central to the Second Amendment must be struck down.”

Further: “For if self-defense outside the home is part of the core right to ‘bear arms’ and the California regulatory scheme prohibits the exercise of that right, no amount of interest-balancing under a heightened form of means-ends scrutiny can justify San Diego County’s policy.”



The Ninth Circuit!!! Wow! Just wow!



Considering the court, I’m a little surprised, but very gratified. But I don’t expect to be able to get my CC permit any time soon here in Marin County, California.


That’s what I was thinking. I’ll even say it backward: !woW


Apparently, the Heller and MacDonald rulings have finally sunk in. :thumbsup:
Let’s not forget, though, about “his pen and phone”. :eek:



Qui subscriptionibus tuus non latine?


So the court that gets over 60% of its cases reversed finally gets one right. :thumbsup:


That’s great! I also hope that real Catholicism will thrive once more in Marin County!


There goes the neighborhood!


Not sure where you are getting your stats. I’m too lazy to look up the current figures, but they probably haven’t changed a lot from what I posted five years ago

[quote=Digitonomy]In the past 12 months the Ninth Circuit has issued 868 written decisions. The Supreme Court lets stand the vast majority of 9th Circuit rulings - I think it took up about 16 this year.


In a dissent, Judge Sidney Thomas, a President Clinton appointee, said the majority ruling “upends the entire California firearm regulatory scheme.”,0,3489492.story#ixzz2tQgXckao

To which I say “no kidding!”


This is from an article in the ABA Journal.
For some time, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has suffered a reputation as being the circuit most at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court. The San Francisco-based court has frequently been the most reversed among the circuit courts, with one term in the mid-1990s seeing 27 of its 28 decisions reversed or vacated by the high court.

But more recently, another federal circuit has reigned as the most reversed. The 6th Circuit, based in Cincinnati, has had a particularly dismal record before the high court. In the seven Supreme Court terms completed since the fall of 2005, the 6th Circuit has been reversed 31 out of 38 times, for an 81.6 percent reversal rate, based on figures compiled by two Philadelphia lawyers. That leads all the federal circuits for that time period, with the 9th Circuit coming in as the second most reversed—100 out of 128 cases, or 78.1 percent.

In that article, it does look like they’re only addressing the percentage of appealed cases that went before the Supreme Court, not how many were actually decided by the circuits but were not appealed.

It just depends on what numbers we’re going to use. One person can say they were reversed 78% of the time, another can say they were reversed 16% and both can be correct.


Of the cases the Supreme Court takes on, the 9th is the most overturned court. As the judges have stated previously, just because they don’t take on a case doesn’t mean they agree with the decision. :shrug:

If you want stats on SCOTUS, see They have all sorts of stats. The one I found the most surprising is that nearly 50% of all decisions are unanimous.


Well, yes. If SuperLuigi meant the Ninth Circuit “finally gets one right,” in the eyes of the Supreme Court based on the reversal rate from cases that went to the high court, then he is being premature and likely erroneous because this one has not yet been appealed. In fact it is unlikely the Supreme Court will hear this appeal if it occurs, so the case will never have a chance to become part of the 60 or 40%.


I’ve actually used ScotusBlog to refute the claim about the 9th being the most overturned court on a few previous occasions here, but didn’t do so in my first post above because SuperLuigi didn’t make such a claim.

The stats vary from year to year. The Ninth Circuit tends to have a high rate of being overturned, moreso than the high average rate of all the circuit courts. However, there are usually one or more other courts that have all their cases before the Supreme Court overturned, and the Ninth Circuit as the largest circuit usually has a few cases upheld, so their percentage is rarely the worst. Even sampling over a number of terms gives conflicting results, as demonstrated by FrDavid96’s source.


What I was trying to say (and did not do a very good job of it, I admit) is that when asking “what percentage of their cases are overturned?” can actually yield different correct answers, even if we’re only talking about a particular year.

One can use as the starting-point A—“all cases decided by the 9th Circuit” or B—“all cases decided by the 9th, for which an appeal to the SCOTUS is filed” or C—“all cases of the 9th which are actually heard by SCOTUS”

As we go from A to C, each time, the number gets smaller (so the percent overturned gets higher)

Let’s say they hear 1000 cases a year (I’ll keep the numbers imaginary and easy).

The 9th hears 1000 cases. Of those, 500 file an appeal with SCOTUS, but they hear 100 of them. 80 of them are overturned.

One person could say that only 8% are overturned, someone else could say 16% and another could say 80%. All of them would be correct.


I know it changes from term to term. But, in general based on the number of cases that get overturned, they are #1. Partially because they have one of the highest number of cases that reach SCOTUS. Some districts are luck to get a handful a year.


Well, more importantly, since the government has no obligation/responsibility/duty to protect or defend an individual from a criminal act and it is the individual’s responsibility to protect themselves, as established by precedent:

Warren vs DC
Castle Rock vs Gonzalez
Linda Riss vs The City of New York
Balistreri vs Pacifica Police Department

and by the state of California having gone further and codified it into law/regulation:

(CA codes gov: 845)
845. Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for
failure to establish a police department or otherwise to provide
police protection service or, if police protection service is
provided, for failure to provide sufficient police protection

It only makes sense that the individual should have the means to effectively defend themselves.


That is certainly true, and they are usually in the middle of the pack in terms of pure numbers of reviewed cases that get upheld. But again, SuperLuigiwas talking about percentages.



When seconds count, the police (if there are any) are only minutes away.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit