The en banc Ninth Circuit on March 24 held by a seven-to-four vote that the Second Amendment right does not encompass open handgun carriage. The decision in Young v. Hawaii complements the Circuit’s 2016 en banc Peruta v. San Diego, which held that concealed carry is categorically outside the Second Amendment. Thus, according to the Ninth Circuit, a State may ban both open and concealed carry. There is no right to bear handguns. Carrying arms in public for defense is “not within the scope of the right protected by the Second Amendment.” Four judges dissented, in an opinion written by Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain.

Most revealing about Young’s lengthy majority opinion is how it selectively cites the sources on which it relies.

Part I of this Article examines Young’s treatment of Supreme Court precedents. Part II reviews the Ninth Circuit’s description of English law; Part III American colonial law, and Part IV subsequent American law. Part V discusses the Ninth Circuit’s argument that bearing arms may be banned to respect State and local sovereignty.