California’s war on gun owners took a major hit this week as U.S. District Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo ruled that the state’s prohibition on nonresidents applying for concealed carry permits violates the Constitution.
The case, Hoffman v. Bonta, was brought by Christopher J. Hoffman and the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) against California’s longstanding refusal to issue concealed carry weapons permits (CCWs) to nonresidents, blocking Americans from exercising their Second Amendment rights simply because they live outside state lines.
Judge Bencivengo’s ruling comes down hard on California’s argument that only residents should count as “the people” under the Second Amendment, noting that neither the Supreme Court nor the Ninth Circuit has ever defined “the people” so narrowly.
“The provisions barring nonresidents from applying for CCW licenses violate the Constitution,” Bencivengo wrote in her decision, granting summary judgment to the plaintiffs and clearing the path for a potential injunction against the state’s policy.
The ruling heavily cited Bruen (2022), the landmark Supreme Court case that struck down New York’s “may issue” carry permit scheme and reaffirmed that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.
California’s argument boiled down to pretending that nonresidents are not entitled to the same constitutional protections as residents—a position that Judge Bencivengo rejected outright, signaling that the state’s anti-gun fortress is vulnerable to constitutional challenges.
The judge ordered the parties to “meet and confer and submit a proposed order for an injunction consistent with this order within 30 days,” meaning a direct block on the nonresident CCW ban could take effect within weeks.
The Firearms Policy Coalition celebrated the ruling as a critical victory for gun rights, continuing its aggressive legal strategy against states that have erected unconstitutional barriers to the Second Amendment under the guise of “public safety.”
California has long used residency restrictions as a tool to deny lawful Americans the right to carry while welcoming illegal immigrants and sanctuary policies that fuel crime and violence in cities across the state. This ruling directly challenges that hypocrisy and signals that courts are no longer willing to let California sidestep the Constitution.
Gun owners nationwide have watched as California imposed some of the strictest gun laws in the country, from magazine bans to microstamping requirements, “assault weapons” bans, and a maze of carry restrictions designed to suppress lawful concealed carry. Tuesday’s ruling chips away at the state’s anti-gun firewall and sets up further challenges as more cases leveraging Bruen continue moving through the courts.
California is also facing legal heat over its “sensitive places” expansions, which severely limit where lawful permit holders can carry, and its attempts to impose backdoor gun bans through microstamping and fee requirements.
For nonresident gun owners, the ruling opens a potential pathway to lawful carry in California, giving travelers and workers the ability to protect themselves in a state that has seen spikes in violent crime, carjackings, and retail theft.
The ruling is also a stark reminder that the Second Amendment does not stop at state borders, and residency cannot be used as a weapon to block Americans from exercising fundamental rights.
As anti-gun states continue to ignore the Constitution, the courts are stepping in to remind them that the right to keep and bear arms is not up for negotiation.
For now, Californians—and nonresidents who value their right to self-defense—can take note: the tide is turning, and the Constitution is winning.
