California Ammunition Purchase Checks Block Remains in Place After Ninth Circuit Ruling

Appeals Court Strikes Down California‘s Ammunition Background Check Policy, Citing Second Amendment Violation

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that California’s policy requiring background checks for ammunition purchases violates the Second Amendment, effectively nullifying a 2016 ballot measure aimed at tightening the state’s already strict gun regulations. The ruling, penned by Judge Sandra Segal Ikuta, stated that the law “meaningfully constrains the right to keep operable arms” by necessitating reauthorization for each ammunition purchase by California gun owners.

“The right to keep and bear arms incorporates the right to operate them, which requires ammunition,” the judge wrote, emphasizing that the ability to use firearms is intrinsic to the right to possess them. This decision marks the latest challenge to statewide gun control efforts, following a trend of important restrictions on such measures by both the 9th Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court in the past decade.

The appellate panel’s decision drew heavily on a 2022 Supreme Court ruling that narrowed the scope of state-level gun control laws, stipulating that they must be “consistent with the Nation’s past tradition of firearm regulation.” California’s attempt to justify it’s policy by referencing Reconstruction-era loyalty oaths for gun purchasers was rejected by the panel.The court found no analogy between a one-time loyalty oath and recurring ammunition background check rules, deeming them “not relevant.”

however, judge Jay Bybee dissented, arguing that the majority had deviated from established precedent and Supreme Court guidance. He pointed to data from the California Department of Justice’s Bureau of Firearms, which indicated that the program, in place since 2019, approved 89% of purchases with minimal delays, typically costing one dollar and taking less than a minute. Fewer than 1% of purchases were rejected due to buyer prohibitions, with most rejections being on technicalities that were subsequently resolved.

Bybee contended that while the 2022 Supreme Court case “ushered in a new era for Second Amendment jurisprudence,” it did not invalidate the ammunition background check scheme.He expressed concern that the majority’s broad interpretation of the Second Amendment could invalidate virtually any regulation on firearm or ammunition acquisition.

It remains unclear whether this ruling will immediately lift restrictions that have been in place for six years, as California leaders have not yet announced plans to appeal the decision. Gun violence prevention organizations condemned the ruling, asserting it would compromise public safety and citing instances where the law had helped identify prohibited individuals attempting to purchase ammunition. Conversely, gun rights activists celebrated the decision as a significant victory for Second Amendment rights.

What specific arguments did the plaintiffs in *Rhode Island Builders Association of California v. Bonta* use to claim the ammunition restrictions violated the Second Amendment?

Ninth Circuit Upholds California’s Ammunition Restrictions

On July 30,2025,the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals largely upheld California’s stringent ammunition purchase laws,rejecting a challenge brought by gun rights groups. This ruling effectively keeps in place the requirement for background checks and a 10-day waiting period for ammunition purchases, a system implemented following the passage of Proposition 63 in 2016. The core of the legal battle centered around Second Amendment rights and whether the state’s regulations unduly burdened lawful gun owners.

Understanding the Key Provisions of California’s ammunition Laws

california’s ammunition laws are among the most restrictive in the nation. Key components include:

Background Checks: All ammunition purchasers must undergo a background check through the California Department of Justice (DOJ). This check verifies eligibility based on factors like criminal history, domestic violence restraining orders, and mental health records.

10-Day Waiting Period: A mandatory 10-day waiting period is imposed after the purchase, mirroring the waiting period for firearm purchases.

Ammunition Vendor Licensing: Ammunition vendors must be licensed by the state and adhere to specific security and record-keeping requirements.

Restricted Ammunition Types: certain types of ammunition,deemed especially dangerous,are prohibited.

Single-Sale Limits: Limits on the quantity of ammunition that can be purchased in a single transaction.

The Legal Challenge and Ninth Circuit’s Decision

The lawsuit, Rhode Island Builders Association of California v. Bonta, argued that the ammunition restrictions violated the Second Amendment by infringing on the right to bear arms. Plaintiffs claimed the laws created an undue burden on law-abiding citizens and did not demonstrably enhance public safety.

The Ninth Circuit,however,sided largely with the state,finding that the regulations were a reasonable exercise of California’s police power and did not substantially infringe on Second Amendment rights. The court emphasized the state’s interest in reducing gun violence and preventing ammunition from falling into the wrong hands.

While the court upheld most provisions, it did request further review regarding the state’s record-keeping requirements for ammunition sales, citing potential privacy concerns. This aspect of the ruling leaves room for future legal challenges focused on data security.

Impact on California Gun Owners

The Ninth Circuit’s decision means California gun owners will continue to face significant hurdles when purchasing ammunition. This includes:

Increased Costs: The background check fee and potential travel to licensed vendors add to the overall cost of ammunition.

Limited Access: Fewer vendors are willing to navigate the complex licensing requirements,leading to reduced availability of ammunition in some areas.

Delays: The 10-day waiting period can disrupt shooting activities and create inconvenience for recreational shooters and hunters.

Record keeping: Gun owners must maintain detailed records of ammunition purchases, adding an administrative burden.

What’s Next: Potential for Further Appeals

Despite the Ninth Circuit ruling, the legal battle may not be over.The plaintiffs have indicated they may seek further review by the Supreme Court of the United States. The supreme Court has recently taken a more conservative stance on Second Amendment issues, potentially increasing the chances of a different outcome.

Real-World Example: The Impact on Competitive Shooting

Competitive shooters in California have been particularly affected by the ammunition restrictions. The limited availability and high cost of ammunition make it tough to train and participate in shooting sports.Many shooters have reported traveling out of state to purchase ammunition legally, adding significant expense and logistical challenges.

Benefits of the California System (According to Supporters)

Proponents of California’s ammunition laws argue they offer several benefits:

Reduced Gun Violence: By making it harder for prohibited individuals to obtain ammunition, the laws aim to reduce gun-related crimes.

Enhanced Public Safety: The background checks and waiting period provide a cooling-off period and help prevent impulsive acts of violence.

Improved Law Enforcement Capabilities: The detailed records of ammunition sales can assist law enforcement in investigating gun crimes.

Practical Tips for California Gun Owners

For California gun owners navigating these regulations, here are some practical tips:

1. Plan Ahead: Anticipate the 10-day waiting period and purchase ammunition well in advance of planned shooting activities.
2. Find a Licensed Vendor: Locate a licensed ammunition vendor near you and familiarize yourself with thier procedures.
3. Maintain Accurate Records: Keep detailed records of all ammunition purchases, including date, quantity, and vendor information.
4. Stay Informed: Monitor legal developments and updates to california’s ammunition laws. Resources