After more than two years of litigation, a coalition of Second Amendment groups and advocates have reached a settlement with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department over its policies and practices related to our right to bear arms.
California Rifle & Pistol Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners of California, and Gun Owners Foundation filed suit against LASD and the city of La Verne in December 2023, alleging that the sheriff’s office was taking well over a year to process concealed carry applications, while La Verne officials were imposing exorbitant fees on residents who applied for a California Handgun Permit.
As Second Amendment Foundation Director of Legal Research and Education Kostas Moros pointed out, the lawsuit achieved several significant victories even before today’s settlement.
“This case was ambitious from the start, tackling several different obstacles Californians and visitors faced when trying to exercise their Second Amendment right to carry. While we settled the remaining claims against LASD once they demonstrated compliance with the statutory timelines, the broader impact of the litigation is clear: California residents and nonresidents alike now have more Second Amendment freedoms thanks to the diligent work of SAF and its partners. We will continue monitoring to ensure these gains are not rolled back.”
Among the key results:
- A preliminary injunction forcing California to begin issuing CCW permits to qualified nonresidents – the first ruling in the country confirming that the right to carry does not stop at state lines. That relief was later made permanent when the Legislature enacted AB 1078, which essentially codified the terms of the injunction.
- A preliminary injunction against LASD’s extreme multi-year wait times, which, combined with pressure from a parallel U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit that was filed after our case, led the department to bring its processing times into compliance with state law.
- Changes to California law eliminating automatic five-year bans on CCW eligibility based solely on temporary restraining orders that were dissolved without a full hearing.
- Reforms by the City of La Verne, which subsidized its psychological exam requirement and modestly reduced related fees after being sued over the high total cost of obtaining a permit; the fight on the high fees issue now continues in our lawsuit against Santa Clara.
As SAF acknowledges (and as California resident Moros well knows), there is still plenty of work to be done in the Golden State before the Second Amendment is on a firm footing. The nearly $2,000 it costs to obtain a carry permit in Santa Clara County is just one example of the draconian restrictions that have been put in place to make gun ownership a time consuming, expensive, and legally dangerous activity.
The fact that the LASD is now processing carry applications within the 120 days allotted to it under state law is reason enough for Californians to celebrate, even if four months seems like an awfully long time to wait for those of us in states where permits are typically processed in a matter of weeks. When the CRPA lawsuit was first filed, though, it was taking upwards of 22 months to get a response from the sheriff’s department.
The preliminary injunction that led to the California legislature adopting a law that allows non-residents to carry is also hugely significant, even if it is the first step in a longer journey. SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut says the settlement “marks meaningful progress,” but the work to “secure full recognition of the right to carry – including true interstate reciprocity – continues.”
California has gone from a system that simply didn’t allow non-residents to lawfully bear arms in the state to a scheme that imposes roughly the same infringements that residents face in getting the government’s permission to carry concealed. Non-residents also have to declare where they intend to spend time in the state and are limited to applying only in counties where they say they plan to visit, but the permit itself is valid throughout the state. And unlike states like Massachusetts, non-residents don’t have to drop off their application or sit for an in-person interview before they’re approved.
That’s a genuine improvement, though as Kraut says, true universal reciprocity is the goal. CRPA gets us a little closer to our destination, and the work continues for the plaintiffs in clawing back Californians’ right to keep and bear arms
Editor’s Note: Second Amendment groups across the country are doing everything they can to protect our rights to self-defense and to keep and bear arms.
Help us continue to report on their efforts and legal successes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Read the full article here
