The Wire · CalGunHub

Ninth Circuit panel strikes down ammunition background check law; opinion later vacated

Published July 24, 2025 · Updated October 12, 2026

A 2-1 panel held California's ammunition background check regime facially unconstitutional, but the opinion was vacated for en banc rehearing.

Written by the CalGunHub desk from public reporting

Who this affects: The panel decision described here is vacated and has no legal effect; California's ammunition background check requirements remain in effect while the en banc court considers the case, per the California Department of Justice. An en banc ruling could affirm or reject the panel's reasoning, so this entry should not be read as a final outcome. This is general information, not legal advice.

On July 24, 2025, a divided Ninth Circuit panel decided Rhode v. Bonta, No. 24-542, 145 F.4th 1090 (2025), a challenge to California's ammunition background check regime brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California (No. 3:18-cv-00802-BEN-JLB). Judge Ikuta's 2-1 opinion, over a dissent by Judge Bybee, held the regime facially violates the Second Amendment and affirmed the district court's permanent injunction, the ABA Journal reported. The ruling never took effect because the mandate did not issue. On December 1, 2025, the court granted rehearing en banc, which vacated the panel opinion, and en banc oral argument was held March 25, 2026, in Pasadena. As of the most recent reporting located, dated September 8, 2026, no en banc decision had issued. California's ammunition background check requirements, enacted under Proposition 63 (2016), remain in effect, according to the California Department of Justice.

Informational only, not legal advice. Facts are attributed to the sources listed above.