Can California deny concealed carry permit after the recent SCOTUS decision?
<p>After the recent SCOTUS decision regarding <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/579432436/Supreme-Court-Decision-in-New-York-State-Rifle-Pistol-Assn-Inc-v-Bruen" rel="nofollow noreferrer">concealed carry</a>, can any state, in particular CA, deny a concealed weapon carry permit to its residents, who are not disqualified from gun ownership in any way?</p>

<p>There isn't one simple answer. The case prohibited a showing of a &quot;special need&quot; for a concealed weapon to allow one to have a permit. Many California concealed carry laws have similar requirements.</p>
<p>But, California doesn't have just one concealed carry law. There is a default rule that applies in small, rural counties, but most larger cities and counties in California have their own specific concealed carry laws and the precise grounds for denying a concealed carry permit would matter.</p>
<p>In all likelihood, many provisions of existing California concealed carry laws would remain grounds to deny permission to concealed carry (e.g. age, history of drug abuse, criminal record, restraining orders in place, etc.), while others provisions would no longer constitute valid grounds for a denial.</p>
<p>This particular decision is about denying permits based upon lack of a particularized need for one different from other members of the general public, rather than about any possible reason that the permit applicant could be deemed untrustworthy to have a permit. The decision discusses the idea that it is problematic to have unfettered discretion in issuing permits, but doesn't really base its ultimate conclusion on that ground. So, something like a general residual &quot;good character&quot; requirement, while vague, wouldn't be squarely within the scope of the most recent decision.</p>
<p>The case also doesn't itself prohibit (nor does the case law) some reasonable fee for issuance of a concealed carry permit.</p>
<p>Thus, the new case does not require uniform law with &quot;constitutional carry&quot; for everyone permitted by federal law to own a gun. But, it does prohibit limitations related to a requirement to show a need to have a concealed carry permit.</p>

<p>As it stands, this has no effect on California, which was not a party to the New York lawsuit. <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The ruling</a>, in its wording, is addressed to &quot;respondent&quot; (New York). However, the reasoning could easily apply in the case of California, where a &quot;good cause&quot; requirement is a requirement for a license. In an earlier ruling, a 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit court found the law unconsitutional (<a href="https://cite.case.law/f3d/742/1144/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Peruta v. San Diego County, 2014</a>)
but <a href="https://cite.case.law/f3d/824/919/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">in 2016</a>, the full court upheld the law. The reasoning in the most recent NY ruling could easily translate into an overturning of the California &quot;good cause&quot; requirement.</p>

california weapons