The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals just handed a major win to gun owners in Nguyen v. Bonta, striking down California’s “one-gun-a-month” law as unconstitutional.
California had banned most individuals from buying more than one firearm within a 30-day window. The state argued the restriction would help stop illegal gun trafficking and straw purchases. The court wasn’t buying it.
The panel ruled that the Second Amendment protects both the right to own multiple firearms and the ability to acquire them without excessive delay. According to the judges, restricting how often someone can buy a gun amounts to a “meaningful constraint” on that right.
The court followed the framework set by the Supreme Court in Bruen, which requires states to show that modern gun laws align with historical traditions. California came up short.
SEE ALSO: Hogg Purged from DNC Role
Judges reviewed dozens of laws from the colonial period through Reconstruction. They found nothing even remotely similar to California’s blanket purchase limit. Laws from early America banned sales to specific groups like Native Americans or the intoxicated—but never restricted the timing or number of purchases for ordinary citizens.
The panel also dismissed California’s argument that new technology and modern crime required a “nuanced approach.” They found no evidence that bulk purchases were a unique modern problem. In fact, firearm availability and trafficking existed long before the current era.
While some historical laws tracked sales or imposed licensing requirements, none flat-out banned law-abiding citizens from buying multiple guns. The court emphasized that constitutional rights—including the right to keep and bear arms—can’t be rationed by calendar days.
The ruling doesn’t prevent the state from using other tools to combat illegal gun sales. But the judges made clear that delaying or limiting lawful purchases isn’t one of them.
This decision adds to a growing list of victories for gun rights under the Bruen standard. California can appeal to the full Ninth Circuit or the Supreme Court, but for now, the law is dead.
Gun rights advocates hailed the ruling as a decisive blow against incremental disarmament. The fight over what “infringement” means continues—but this round goes to the Constitution.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
Available on GunsAmerica Now
is a seasoned outdoorsman, lifelong hunter, and the kind of guy who’d rather track whitetails than scroll social media. As an editor for GunsAmerica, he’s got a sharp eye for spotting both solid gear and bad gun laws. Whether he’s deep in the woods or deep in editorial deadlines, Larry brings a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach to firearms, hunting, and the great American tradition of self-reliance. If there’s a hot debate on gun rights or the latest in hunting tech, you can bet Larry’s got an opinion—and it’s probably backed up with both facts and field experience.
Experience:
– Licensed Bowhunter, Hunter, and Trapper – Experienced in ethical hunting and wildlife conservation.
– Concealed Carry Permit Holder (NYS & AZ) – Trained and licensed to carry in multiple states.
– 2A Journalist – Covering firearms legislation, Second Amendment issues, and gun rights for over a decade.
– Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Certified to provide emergency medical care in the field.
– Field-Tested Gear Reviewer – Hands-on experience with firearms, optics, and hunting tech.
This overly restrictive, one gun a month, infringement California gun law has long been a burr under everyone’s saddle blanket.
To give you an idea of, scope of work creep, at first it was applicable to only hand guns, and then since that was sucessful, the Democrats thought they could apply their infringement law to every gun.
The next infringement gun law California’s law abiding residents have their sights on is the Democrats unfair, 11% excise tax on everything gun related.
“California’s gun excise tax is an 11% tax on the gross receipts from retail sales of firearms, firearm precursor parts, and ammunition. It was enacted as part of Assembly Bill 28, also known as the Gun Violence Prevention and School Safety Act. The tax went into effect on July 1, 2024.”
I sure hope everyone living in the non-slave states remembers California’s Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom when he runs for President #48 in 2028. I stopped voting for any Democrat long ago because of their California gun politics. If you want Gavin Newsom to turn the whole USA into an oversized California, then give him one-inch, by voting him and his disciples into office.
Who cares? The residents of ‘The Peoples Republic of Kalifornistan’ continually vote into office these radical left-wing fruit cakes, like Gavin Newscum, and wonder why all their rights are slowing dwindling away. Crime is rampant and out of control with little police support, streets are filled with homeless drug addicts shitting in the streets, people are taxed to death, cost of energy is double what the rest of the country pays, homes burn down because there’s not enough infrastructure to help fight fires due to budget cuts, mayors calling on illegal immigrant gangs to fight and kill law enforcement. Looters, rioters and pillagers have a free hand to do whatever they want, and when the government sends in troops to help YOUR mayors fight them over it, even delivering pallets of bricks and hammers to the rioters to fight the national guard, all funded by assholes like George Soros. And the list goes on…
After the damage is done, you expect the rest of the country to have sympathy for you and help pay for it. Sorry left-coast folks, you voted these buttholes into office, so you can suffer the consequences. Don’t burden the rest of us with your problems because you don’t have enough sense not to vote these liberal buttplugs into office.
how long will this last???
Until the whole 9th hears this case en banc. Then kiss happy days goodbye.