DOJ Bulletin On Recent Open Carry Decision

[cali_jazz]

 

[guncurious]

Watch out out there for BS people are spouting. I was at United Sportsmans in Concord today and the woman taking payment was telling everyone that if they have a CCW it was technically legal for them to open carry until the DOJ figures out what they are going to do.

 

[cali_jazz]

Watch out out there for BS people are spouting. I was at United Sportsmans in Concord today and the woman taking payment was telling everyone that if they have a CCW it was technically legal for them to open carry until the DOJ figures out what they are going to do.

That's insane, great way to get someone killed. I hope you set her straight!

 

[dakient]

Watch out out there for BS people are spouting. I was at United Sportsmans in Concord today and the woman taking payment was telling everyone that if they have a CCW it was technically legal for them to open carry until the DOJ figures out what they are going to do.

Yikes. That’s nuts.

 

[Toshiro Mifune]

When was the last time the State lost at the 3 judge panel on a gun case and the en banc was denied by the 9th?

 

[cali_jazz]

The DOJ is now actively siding with gun owners in major cases before the Ninth Circuit to prevent them from being overturned en banc:

• Ammunition Restrictions (Rhode v. Bonta): On January 8, 2026, the DOJ filed an amicus brief supporting the 3-judge panel’s ruling that California’s ammunition background check law is unconstitutional. This is a direct attempt to influence the en banc rehearing scheduled for March 2026.
  
  
• Open Carry (Baird v. Bonta): Following the January 2, 2026, panel ruling that struck down California’s open-carry ban, the administration has signaled support for the decision. Analysts expect the DOJ to weigh in if the state successfully petitions for an en banc rehearing.

 

[Freetureless]

When was the last time the State lost at the 3 judge panel on a gun case and the en banc was denied by the 9th?

Last year. Rhode v. Bonta

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

That's insane, great way to get someone killed. I hope you set her straight!

I’ll have a talk with her, I know her. She’s a nice person/good people.

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

Watch out out there for BS people are spouting. I was at United Sportsmans in Concord today and the woman taking payment was telling everyone that if they have a CCW it was technically legal for them to open carry until the DOJ figures out what they are going to do.

That's insane, great way to get someone killed. I hope you set her straight!

She’s says that’s what one of the main guys at DAP (not going to disclose the name even though I know who it is) told her and other people in the office, that she mentioned that she did not know if it would be overturned, and ninth circuit found California in violation of the right to carry a gun. She also said she’s mentioned that she would not recommend walking around with a gun visible.

I wouldn’t blame it on her since she was given false information; especially since it seemed like it from someone credible or would know more than them. I sent her the official doj notice though.

 

[cali_jazz]

She’s says that’s what one of the main guys at DAP (not going to disclose the name even though I know who it is) told her and other people in the office, that she did not know if it would be overturned, and ninth circuit found California in violation of the right to carry a gun. She also said she’s mentioned that she would not recommend walking around with a gun visible.

I wouldn’t blame it on her since she was given false information; especially since it seemed like it from someone credible or would know more than them. I sent her the official doj notice though.

DAP?

 

[2muchsoysauce4allthisrice]

DAP?

Diablo Action Pistol

 

[DrJonesUSA]

The DOJ is now actively siding with gun owners in major cases before the Ninth Circuit to prevent them from being overturned en banc:

• Ammunition Restrictions (Rhode v. Bonta): On January 8, 2026, the DOJ filed an amicus brief supporting the 3-judge panel’s ruling that California’s ammunition background check law is unconstitutional. This is a direct attempt to influence the en banc rehearing scheduled for March 2026.
  
  
• Open Carry (Baird v. Bonta): Following the January 2, 2026, panel ruling that struck down California’s open-carry ban, the administration has signaled support for the decision. Analysts expect the DOJ to weigh in if the state successfully petitions for an en banc rehearing.

Can you please explain like I'm 5, why they'd do this?
I'm imagining something along the lines of a full, en banc overturn is far more damaging to the state?

How are shenanigans like this legal & allowed to happen?
This is obvious bull and a pathetic attempt to game the system.