Trump Ends National Guard Deployments in Major Cities Amid Legal Setbacks and Crime Debate 
Najib Razak Awaits Court Rulings in 1MDB Case as Malaysia’s Anti-Graft Drive Faces Test 
South Korea Prosecutor Alleges Former First Lady Kim Keon Hee Abused Power for Bribes 
MSF Faces Possible Ban From Gaza as Israel Enforces New Aid Registration Rules 
Russian Missile Strike Devastates Apartment Building in Kharkiv, Killing Civilians 
China Proposes Stricter Rules for AI Services Offering Emotional Interaction 
Kim Jong Un Visits Greenhouse Farm Construction Site Near China Border Ahead of Key Party Congress 
California DMV Proposes New Safety Rules for Autonomous Vehicles After Waymo Incidents 
Trump Administration Clarifies Minnesota Childcare Funding Status Amid Fraud Claims 
Seatrium Reaches $475 Million Settlement With Maersk Over Offshore Wind Vessel Project 
Philippines Challenges Chinese Research Vessel Spotted Near Cagayan Coast 
Bolsonaro Undergoes Second Medical Procedure for Persistent Hiccups While Hospitalized in Brasilia 
EU Condemns U.S. Visa Ban on European Figures, Warns of Firm Response 
Trump Delays Tariff Increases on Furniture and Cabinets for One More Year 
Vanda Pharmaceuticals Wins FDA Approval for New Motion Sickness Drug After Four Decades 
China Imposes 55% Tariff on Beef Imports Above Quota to Protect Domestic Industry 
U.S. Judge Blocks Deportation of British Anti-Disinformation Campaigner Imran Ahmed Amid Free Speech Dispute 
A U.S. federal appeals court has ruled that California’s long-standing ban on openly carrying firearms in most parts of the state violates the Second Amendment, marking a significant development in ongoing legal battles over gun control laws. The decision was issued Friday by a divided three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
In a 2-1 ruling, the court sided with a California gun owner who challenged the state’s prohibition on open carry in counties with populations exceeding 200,000 residents. This threshold covers roughly 95% of California’s population, effectively making open carry illegal across most of the state. The panel concluded that the law was unconstitutional under the framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
Writing for the majority, U.S. Circuit Judge Lawrence VanDyke, appointed by former President Donald Trump, stated that open carry has deep historical roots in the United States that predate the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791. He emphasized that the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling requires modern firearm regulations to align with the nation’s historical tradition of gun regulation. According to VanDyke, the historical record clearly supports the practice of openly carrying firearms for self-defense.
The opinion noted that more than 30 U.S. states generally permit open carry and that California itself allowed the practice without penalty until 2012. Another Trump-appointed judge joined VanDyke’s opinion. However, the panel rejected a separate challenge to California’s open-carry licensing system in smaller counties, which may issue permits at local discretion.
Senior U.S. Circuit Judge N. Randy Smith dissented, arguing that California’s firearm restrictions fully comply with Supreme Court precedent. Meanwhile, California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office said it is reviewing its legal options and reaffirmed its commitment to defending the state’s gun laws.
The ruling partially overturns a lower court’s 2023 decision and comes amid a wave of nationwide challenges to firearm regulations following the Bruen decision. Notably, the 9th Circuit previously upheld California’s restrictions on carrying guns in designated “sensitive places” such as bars, parks, and stadiums, underscoring that the broader legal debate over gun rights in California is far from settled.
