The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a decisive mandate overturning California’s “one-gun-a-month” firearm purchase restriction. The August 14, 2025, mandate enforces a prior ruling that found the law unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. This decision marks a significant legal victory for gun rights advocates in one of the most restrictive states in the country.
The case, Nguyen v. Bonta, was brought by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), Firearms Policy Coalition, San Diego County Gun Owners PAC, two licensed firearm dealers, and six private citizens, including lead plaintiff Michelle Nguyen. The challenged law limited law-abiding residents to buying only one handgun or semi-automatic centerfire rifle—or a combination of the two—within a 30-day period from licensed dealers.
On June 20, 2025, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel affirmed a lower court decision striking down the restriction. Writing for the majority, Judge Danielle Forrest ruled that the “one-gun-a-month” limit violated the Constitution. She stated that both the possession of multiple firearms and the ability to acquire them without undue restrictions are protected by the Second Amendment, and that California’s law lacked historical precedent within the nation’s firearm regulations.
The August 14 mandate now makes that decision enforceable, officially ending the restriction. SAF founder and executive vice president Alan Gottlieb celebrated the ruling, calling it “a huge step forward in one of the most gun-restrictive states in America” and affirming the organization’s commitment to restoring constitutional rights for Californians.
The Ninth Circuit’s action reinforces a growing trend in federal courts to strike down modern gun control measures that cannot be tied to the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. This ruling will likely have ripple effects beyond California, as similar purchase limitations in other states could face fresh legal challenges under the same reasoning.
