For those who haven’t been paying close attention (And no, we don’t expect all of our readers to be as obsessive as we are!) the Peruta case in California was back in the news this week. California Attorney General, and gubernatorial hopeful, Kamala Harris petitioned the Court to allow her office to appeal the case. In this case, the Court ruled that San Diego County’s rules for concealed carry permits (CCW) were unconstitutional. The Sheriff’s “good cause” requirement had the end effect of denying permits to anyone. (Though, the rules seem to be different for friends of the Sheriff.) When the Sheriff declined to appeal the ruling, Harris asked to take his place. The Court said no. Also asking to intervene was the
Brady Campaign Brady Center whateveritis HCI is calling themselves these days. There’s an outside chance that they’ll be allowed to ask for an en banc hearing of the ruling that denied them the opportunity to ask for an en banc hearing of the Court’s original ruling, but that’s not likely.
San Diego County, like most urban counties in California, simply doesn’t issue permits. Their “may issue” rules, no matter how biased, unfair, or illogical, were allowed by the courts. The courts’ reasoning was that open carry was an option in the State and that a citizen therefore didn’t need a CCW permit to exercise his or her 2nd Amendment right. This changed with the passage of AB144 in 2011. That law banned open carry in this State. The Legislature and the Governor were warned, here and elsewhere, that cases like Peruta would be filed if AB144 became law. And now they find themselves one step closer to being ordered by the Court to follow “shall issue” CCW rules.