SAF, Partners Challenge Insane Requirements for Carry Permits in Santa Clara

The Bruen decision changed a lot about what states could do to restrict concealed carry. In theory, they shouldn’t restrict it at all, but some states keep electing people who can’t get that through their thick skulls. These people are so dense on the subject that they have their own gravity well.

The problem is that we keep having to take each law as it comes, then challenge it in court, which takes time. During that time, a lot of good, decent people are discouraged from exercising their right to keep and bear arms.

And as bad as it is in some states, in Santa Clara County, California, it’s even worse.

Luckily, the Second Amendment Founding, along with their partners, are making the challenge, because this stuff is ridiculous.

From a press release:

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed a new lawsuit challenging the Santa Clara County Sheriff Department’s exorbitant fees and mandated psychological exam associated with applying for a concealed carry permit. 

Joining SAF in the lawsuit are the California Rifle and Pistol Association and several individuals. In Blank v. Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Department, the lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of carry permit policies and practices that charge excessive and burdensome fees to obtain a concealed carry permit in Santa Clara. 

“Fees this extreme for the application of a simple permit can only be in place for one reason – to keep the peaceable citizens of Santa Clara from exercising their Second Amendment rights,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “These fees amount to nothing short of a pay-to-play scheme wherein only those with the means to afford the application costs have the ability to exercise their constitutional rights. Not only is this discriminatory, but it’s a clear violation of the Second Amendment.”  

As noted in the complaint, “By imposing such high licensing fees for a CCW permit application and mandating psychological testing without good cause, Santa Clara County is merely substituting an unconstitutional wealth qualification for a corrupt political patronage scheme that has the effect of suppressing its residents’ Second Amendment rights.”

“Beyond the high initial cost of the application fee, people are required to pay for a training course, psychological exam, and Live Scan fingerprinting,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “All those fees add up to around $2,000 or more, making obtaining a concealed carry permit out of reach for a large swath of the public. It’s not a far stretch to see that this fee structure is simply another way to deliberately discourage people from exercising their constitutional right to bear arms.” 

The fee for the permit alone amounts to $976.00 ($488 initial fee + $488 issuance fee), so coupling that with requiring someone to jump through the other hoops as well is beyond ridiculous.

Especially since we know how often the experts actually miss recognizing if a patient is violent.

This is vile. This goes beyond what anyone can or should consider reasonable. 

Now, I get that Santa Clara is a pretty wealthy county. According to the US Census Bureau, the median household income is more than $160,000 per year, so $2,000 might not sound like much compared to that, but there should never be a wealth level for exercising a constitutionally protected right. We let the homeless speak freely, just as we let Elon Musk speak, because rights are for everyone.

Making someone spend somewhere in the $2,000 range might not be a huge deal for the wealthy, but it is for those who aren’t.

Seven percent of the population of the county lives below the poverty line. That means there’s a significant number who live somewhere just above it but nowhere near the median income level. Are those people unworthy of exercising their rights? These are the people most likely to be faced with crime in their communities, and the county wants to make them spend thousands just to be able to lawfully carry a gun?

Meanwhile, the state takes domestic terrorists and tries to put them back out on the streets hours after their attack.

This is insane. This should never be tolerated.

I’m glad to see the challenge take place, and I can’t imagine any universe where this kind of thing will be considered acceptable under the Constitution.

Yes, even in California.

Editor’s Note: President Trump and Republicans across the country are doing everything they can to protect our Second Amendment rights and right to self-defense.

Help us continue to report on their efforts and legislative successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.