A federal appeals court dealt a major blow to California’s gun laws Friday, ruling the state’s open-carry ban in most populated areas violates the Second Amendment because it cannot be justified under the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

In a 2–1 decision, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit said California’s restriction on openly carrying firearms fails the Supreme Court’s modern Second Amendment test, which requires gun regulations to align with how firearms were regulated at the time of the nation’s founding.

California’s law bars open carry in counties with populations over 200,000 — effectively prohibiting it across most of the state — and the court said banning conduct at the core of the Second Amendment imposes more than a minimal burden on the right to keep and bear arms.

Writing for the majority, one justice called the case “straightforward,” noting that open carry was not banned at the nation’s founding and was historically viewed as constitutionally protected conduct.

“In our Nation’s history and tradition, open carry was widely recognized as being central to the Second Amendment right,”  justice Lawrence VanDyke wrote in invalidating California’s law. “A ban on that which is at the core of the Second Amendment is not a ‘minimal burden’ on the Second Amendment right.”

A lawsuit was filed in 2019 and wound its way through the courts for years before gaining new momentum following the Supreme Court’s 2022 expansion of Second Amendment protections.

That decision has since triggered a wave of rulings nationwide, with judges striking down gun laws that had long withstood legal challenges, according to The Hill.

In a separate opinion, justice Kenneth Lee accused California of misleading residents in smaller counties — where the open-carry ban does not apply — about how they can lawfully carry firearms. “Our constitutional rights,” Lee wrote, “should not hinge on a Where’s Waldo quiz,” The Hill reported.

The court declined to dismantle California’s open-carry licensing system in those smaller counties, ruling that plaintiff Mark Baird had waived some related arguments. In dissent, N. Randy Smith, a George W. Bush appointee, said the majority misread Supreme Court precedent and argued states may prohibit one form of public carry — open or concealed — as long as another legal option remains available, The Hill said.