Mirabelli v. Bonta

On March 2, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a pivotal decision in Mirabelli v. Bonta, a case targeting California’s longstanding assault weapons ban. The plaintiffs, including Frank Mirabelli and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, claimed that the prohibition on popular semi-automatic firearms violated the Second Amendment under the historical test established in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. The district court had previously struck down the law, finding no enduring American tradition of banning arms in common use for self-defense. The Ninth Circuit affirmed, ruling that California failed to identify sufficiently analogous historical regulations, and that the ban impermissibly restricted a broad category of firearms owned by millions of law-abiding citizens. The judgment immediately invalidated the state’s assault weapon restrictions, though enforcement was stayed to allow for further appellate review. The ruling sent shockwaves through gun policy debates nationwide.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s permanent injunction, declaring the California assault weapons ban unconstitutional and enjoining its enforcement.

Whether California’s assault weapons ban violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms under the Supreme Court’s text-and-history test, which requires the government to justify firearm restrictions by demonstrating a historical tradition of analogous regulation.

The ruling intensified the national debate over gun control and Second Amendment jurisprudence. It triggered immediate calls for legislative action in California and other states, and was expected to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Gun rights advocates hailed it as a major victory, while gun control groups warned of increased dangers to public safety.