BAIRD V. BONTA
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Reversed in Part
In a split decision, the Ninth Circuit held that California’s categorical ban on openly carrying handguns in counties with more than 200,000 residents violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments because historical tradition uniformly protected open carry. The panel therefore reversed the district court as to the urban ban but affirmed the dismissal of challenges to California’s separate rural licensing scheme, remanding for entry of judgment in favor of the plaintiff on the urban-ban portion.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether a state may constitutionally ban the open carriage of handguns while still issuing shall-issue concealed-carry licenses without violating the Second Amendment after N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen.
Circuit Positions
State may NOT ban open carry even if concealed carry licenses are available; open carry is independently protected by the Second Amendment.
State MAY ban open carry so long as it permits concealed carry through a shall-issue regime.
Conflict Summary
The Ninth Circuit held that an urban open-carry ban is unconstitutional even though concealed carry is available, concluding that open carry enjoys independent historical protection. The Second Circuit (Frey v. City of New York, 2025) upheld a similar open-carry ban, reasoning that history allows a state to eliminate one mode of carry (open) so long as another (concealed) remains available. Thus, the circuits disagree on whether open and concealed carry are fungible for constitutional purposes.