A little over a week after a tragic shooting massacre at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a lower court decision by the San Francisco 9th Circuit to restrict the concealed carry of handguns.
This is the second time in two years that the court has declined to step into the fray regarding concealed carry laws, but the first time it has done so with the controversial new Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who frequently ruled in favor of far-reaching gun rights during his time on the United States Court of Appeals.
Now buttressed by a solid Republican majority, it’s likely gun rights activists were hoping for a different outcome, rather than the same stance with a similar case last year. Democrats can be grateful that the decision was upheld, rather than thrust into the national stage as the first major case of the latest Supreme Court.
And grateful they were.
BREAKING: The Supreme Court just rejected a request to challenge California's laws which ban most people from carrying guns outside of their home without a specially requested and granted permit.
This is the Supreme Court with 2 Trump Appointees!
Another WIN for America!
— Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) November 5, 2018
A good sign so far from this court. We do not need any legislation from the bench.
— BWs Macas (@nomaya_e) November 5, 2018
Wow! Being a California resident and voter, I'm grateful for this outcome. A win for California and the USA.
States rights are supposedly considered inviolate by conservatives…when it serves their purposes. They lost a big one here with national implications going forward.
— Greg Starr (@mansome1) November 5, 2018
Some knew that the San Francisco court’s ruling already made sense.
1. Federalism works and is.
2. The State of CA has PLENARY POWER under the 10th Amendment to REGULATE its own Health and Morals.
Both these justify the Supreme Court's refusal to hear the case.
— Secret t (@Secret____t) November 5, 2018
— VOTE NOVEMBER 6 (@JHunter65284456) November 5, 2018
maybe they read that well regulated part of the 2nd amendment.
— bob hawkins (@poozwah) November 5, 2018
While the Supreme Court ruled in 2008 (and nationally in 2010) that the ownership of a firearm for self-defense in one’s residence is a constitutional right, current California law prohibits concealed carry in public without a permit from a local sheriff, who must determine good cause for issuing it.
For the California couple attempting to bring the case to the court, one sheriff denied their request. In the suit, they claimed that the concealed carry permit was an undue burden and that the sheriff had violated their 14th Amendment rights.
Not everyone was happy with the court’s decision.