The fight for Open Carry in Baird v. Bonta reached a historic milestone when a 3-judge panel struck down California’s urban open-carry ban. Now, California has forced an 11-judge En Banc rehearing. We must defend our victory all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (No. 24-565)
Judge VanDyke authored the opinion holding that California’s ban on open carry in counties over 200,000 population violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments under the Bruen standard.
Tracing the decade-long constitutional struggle against California's open carry bans.
California Legislature expands carry prohibitions by enacting Penal Code § 26350, banning even unloaded open carry in urban counties (populations over 200,000). Combined with § 25850, 95% of California citizens are completely barred from openly bearing arms for self-defense.
Mark Baird files federal civil rights litigation in the Eastern District of California against the Attorney General, asserting that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments explicitly guarantee the right to openly carry firearms in public.
SCOTUS hands down NYSRPA v. Bruen, establishing that gun regulations must match the Nation's historical text and tradition of firearm regulation, discarding multi-tiered interest balancing.
In a historic decision authored by Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke, the panel held that California's urban open-carry ban violates the Second Amendment. The court emphasized that open carry has been protected throughout American history and tradition.
The Ninth Circuit vacates our panel victory and orders an 11-judge panel rehearing en banc. The open-carry restriction is put back into temporary effect while the court reevaluates the decision.
What the impending 11-judge panel ruling means for our legal strategy and eventual appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The 11-judge en banc court agrees with Judge VanDyke’s panel opinion and strikes down California's urban open-carry restrictions.
The en banc majority sides with the State, claiming that permitting concealed carry satisfies the Second Amendment.
The en banc court remands the case back down to District Court for further historical record building or factual findings.
Fighting anti-gun legislation backed by state resources requires immense financial commitments. The Attorney General’s office utilizes taxpayer dollars to deploy legal teams, whereas our defense depends entirely on individual grassroots patriots.
Post-Bruen litigation requires deep archival research into 18th and 19th-century statutes to satisfy strict legal history standards.
Drafting specialized reports, responding to state motions, and coordinating amicus briefs costs tens of thousands of dollars per stage.
Preparing petitions, briefs on the merits, and mock oral argument sessions for Supreme Court justices demands hundreds of specialized legal hours.
Directly funding legal fees for the Ninth Circuit En Banc hearing.
Baird v. Bonta is a defining battle for the fundamental right to carry firearms publicly in America. Your support keeps our legal team on the frontline.
