SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California lawmaker will make another attempt to shore up the state’s concealed carry gun laws following a U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down key provisions.
Sen. Anthony Portantino, D-Burbank, introduced his bill on Dec. 5, the first day of the new legislative session, after his last concealed carry measure narrowly failed in the Assembly during the final hours of the last lawmaking term.
Portantino told The Sacramento Bee that Senate Bill 2 in its current form is a “spot bill,” or placeholder measure that will be amended with more specific language in the future. He said he remains committed to getting it passed.
The senator and Attorney General Rob Bonta promoted Portantino’s original bill in June, after the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated laws in eight states requiring concealed carry applicants to provide reasons for needing a gun in public and to show they would use it properly.
California was one of the states with this “may issue” law, and the court’s decision required its standards to fall in line with “shall issue” rules. This means California can still require a concealed carry permitting process, but it can’t disqualify people from carrying a gun based on the reasons they offer.
Previously, the state had strict rules, but local law enforcement also had some latitude to determine how freely they issued permits. The decision means the state is now lacking a consistent statewide rule, with different standards in each jurisdiction.
Concealed carry bill would standardize permits
The new bill doesn’t contain specific language yet, but Portantino’s measure from the 2021-22 session would have set permitting standards that fall within the Supreme Court’s new requirements.
Concealed carry permit holders would need to be 21 or older, receive at least 16 hours of firearm training, undergo a background check and obtain character references.
Those who receive permits could have them revoked for different reasons, including if they were a danger to themselves or others, abused alcohol or drugs or had protective or restraining orders against them.
It also would have banned firearms from some spaces entirely, including schools, courts, government buildings, prisons, hospitals, airports, sports arenas, churches, libraries and businesses that serve alcohol. Residents could not bring guns into privately-owned businesses, unless there are signs specifically allowing them.
Previous bill failed
Portantino’s previous bill came down to the wire on the last day lawmakers could pass legislation. It was an urgency measure, meaning it needed a two-thirds Assembly vote to take effect immediately.
Portantino, Bonta and Gov. Gavin Newsom all spent the final hours of the session lobbying lawmakers to push the bill through. It failed by two votes, getting support from 52 of the 54 members needed for passage.
Bonta told The Sacramento Bee that night members were asking questions about the list of places where guns would be allowed and whether certain parts of the bill would stand up to legal scrutiny.
It’s unclear whether SB 2 will also need to meet the two-thirds threshold. It is currently labeled non-urgency, which means it would not take effect until 2024.
____
