9/9/24 SB2 status??

[Calif Mini]

SB2:

First is, THANK YOU CRPA for all the ongoing work on SB2 and more.

I recently renewed my membership and added a donation.

So we know recently CRPA says we won some items and we fell short on some items.

What I am not sure of is, are we still fighting the lost items or is SB2 now in effect with those losses now enforceable?

I feel there is info available but not sure where to find the source to know when this goes into effect so I am not putting myself in any jeopardy.

Took a long time to get a CCW and want to play by the rules.

Thanks in advance.
Ed

[Preston-CLB]

Ed, you can find more info on the recent 9th Circus opinion in the following thread here at CG.

https://www.calguns.net/forum/politics-litigation-and-activism/2nd-amend-litigation-updates-legal-discussion/54252906-may-v-bonta-9th-circuit-panel-decision-in?p=54257823#post54257823

I hope this helps!

I just renewed my CCW, and like you, I want to play by rules, as unconstitutional as they are.
-P

[Calif Mini]

Ed, you can find more info on the recent 9th Circus opinion in the following thread here at CG.

https://www.calguns.net/forum/politics-litigation-and-activism/2nd-amend-litigation-updates-legal-discussion/54252906-may-v-bonta-9th-circuit-panel-decision-in?p=54257823#post54257823

I hope this helps!

I just renewed my CCW, and like you, I want to play by rules, as unconstitutional as they are.
-P

Thank you. Guess I was hoping for a miracle. :-(

[Heatseeker]

I know this is an old thread, but I have a relevant question. Hopefully some will have some kind of an answer.

The above link shows the 9th's decision regarding sensitive places, I recall receiving the CRPA email a while back. Yesterday, I was attending my 8 hr. CCW renewal class(another way for the state to make life a little more miserable) when we came upon this very subject. The instructor pulled up the CRPA email and read off the areas we got back from the ruling. Then he took us to the State's legislative pages and, lo and behold, there is no amendment to the statue. The only amendment listed is to do with the state's BS roster of locking devices. I am almost certain the lack of amendment is Bonta's way of flipping the decision off.

So the question came up in our discussion: What if one were to be engaged by LEO at, lets say, an Urgent Care facility. According to the above referenced decision, one would be within the law. But since there is no amendment to the statue, would the DA put a charge on you? Our instructor didn't have an answer and I don't recall reading anywhere where anybody has been a crash test dummy yet.

What say you experts?

[1911-CV]

The statute hasn't changed, there is a preliminary injunction preventing enforcement. The DA would know that.

[Heatseeker]

That makes sense.
Thanks for the reply.

[Rickybillegas]

I agree. An uniformed officer may be confused (like everyone else) and cite, but when it reaches the commanding officer or DA they would know and there would be no charges.
It could still be a hassle.

[Dvrjon]

Statutes are not amended during the judicial appeal process as a higher court may upset the lower court’s ruling. For example, the Large Capacity Magazine controls in code (32310) still remain even though they were found unconstitutional in 2019 (Duncan v Bonta) as the decision is still under appeal to the SCOTUS.

Even if a code is finally upset, the Legislature will not amend the section out until there is a “cleanup” of the code. An administrative note in the history of the code citation will record the final status.

Regarding SB 2, it is still under appellate process so the codes won’t be changed. In the interim, DOJ issued wide-spread guidance on this in March.

https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/2025-dle-06.pdf