In a 2‑1 decision, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Rhode v. Bonta held that California’s statute requiring a background check for every ammunition purchase is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The ruling affirms a lower court’s permanent injunction against enforcing California Penal Code §§ 30312 through 30370.
The ruling is not yet in effect, pending the court’s formal mandate. In addition, the state may request an en banc review from the entire 9th Circuit Court, which could delay lifting of the ammo regulations for up to 42 days.
The court applied the Bruen test, concluding that the law implicates the plain text of the Second Amendment because it imposes meaningful constraints on the ability to keep operable firearms, including delays and fees and restrictions that apply even to out‑of‑state purchases by California residents.
Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta wrote that California failed to show its requirement was consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, as required by Bruen. In dissent, Judge Jay Bybee argued the law imposes only a negligible burden — a one-dollar fee and minimal delay — and thus does not meaningfully constrain the right to keep and bear arms.
California officials, including Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta, expressed disappointment and said they would consider further legal options.
What the Decision Means for FFLs Shipping Ammo to California
- Background checks no longer required
The ruling permanently prohibits enforcement of California’s ammunition background check requirement. FFLs shipping ammunition into California cannot be forced to submit customers to background checks under this law. - Out‑of‑state shipments unaffected by prior restrictions
The law previously covered out‑of‑state ammunition vendors shipping to California residents; now that element of the statute is enjoined. FFLs shipping into California from other states may proceed under standard federal law. - Must still comply with federal law
FFLs must continue to comply with federal statutes, including 18 U.S.C. § 926A and related regulations. Rhode v. Bonta did not affect federal rules governing interstate ammunition transfers. - Supply chain implications
The removal of the background check requirement may simplify logistics and reduce administrative burden for FFLs supplying California. Permitting costs and processing delays imposed by the state will cease. - Possible appeal or stay
California may seek a rehearing en banc or file a petition to the Supreme Court. Until such actions are resolved the injunction remains in effect, meaning FFLs may operate under the status quo.
Bottom Line for FFLs
For FFLs shipping ammunition to California customers, Rhode v. Bonta eliminates the state’s requirement for background checks on every ammunition purchase. The ruling clarifies that California’s requirement posed an unconstitutional burden on the Second Amendment. As long as no higher court reverses or stays the decision, FFLs may resume interstate ammunition sales without requiring state background checks, though they must continue to follow federal rules.
California may still pursue appeals. Until then FFLs should monitor developments and continue to comply with federal licensing and interstate commerce provisions.
By Allen Forkner, GunBroker Publisher
