Victory in Rhode v. Bonta Puts California’s Ammo Purchase Restrictions on Ice—For Now

California – In a huge win for California gun owners—and the Second Amendment—the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has ruled that the state’s controversial ammunition background check law is unconstitutional.

The case, Rhode v. Bonta, challenged California’s 2016 law that forced residents to pass a background check every single time they bought ammunition, whether it was a box of .22 for plinking or hunting rounds for the weekend. The court found that the law “meaningfully constrains” the right to keep and bear arms by making it harder—and sometimes impossible—for law-abiding citizens to obtain ammo needed to use their firearms.

This decision comes after nearly eight years of litigation and was closely watched by gun rights advocates nationwide. The case was backed by the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA), with support from groups like Ammunition Depot, Able’s Ammo, and Olympic shooting champion Kim Rhode, who served as the lead plaintiff.

“This is a big win for all gun owners in California,” said Rhode. “Once again, California has been found to be wanting, and the courts, with proper review, noted that gun owners have the law on our side.”

The court applied the Bruen test—a landmark 2022 Supreme Court decision—which requires gun laws to be rooted in the nation’s historical tradition. California’s ammo background check failed that test.

9th Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta, writing for the majority, said plainly:

“California’s ammunition background check regime is unconstitutional… [It] infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.”

Chuck Michel, President and General Counsel for CRPA, didn’t hold back in his response:

“This case has been a long, hard fight against overreaching government gun control. But a firearm cannot be effective without the ammunition to make it operable.”

CRPA and other plaintiffs argued that the law created unnecessary costs, delays, and denials for gun owners trying to purchase ammunition—even for people who had already passed background checks to own a firearm. The court agreed.

Meanwhile, anti-gun groups and California officials expressed disappointment, with Everytown Law calling the checks “common sense” and “minimal”—a claim the court clearly rejected.

The ruling also struck down California’s ban on importing ammunition from out of state unless it goes through a licensed vendor. That law had blocked Californians from buying ammo online or during road trips and bringing it home without government interference.

The Saint Benitez Effect

Rhode v. Bonta was first struck down by Judge Roger Benitez—nicknamed ‘Saint Benitez’ by many gun owners—who issued the original district court injunction against California’s ammunition restrictions, a decision now upheld by the Ninth Circuit.

A key plaintiff in the case, Ammunition Depot, celebrated the decision as a pivotal moment in restoring constitutional rights.

“We are thrilled by this victory, which stands as a testament to the power of the Constitution,” said Dan Wolgin, CEO of Ammunition Depot. “Today’s ruling is a major step forward for the Second Amendment and the rights of every law-abiding citizen.”

Wolgin also acknowledged that the legal process may not be over yet, as California could still seek further review:

“We understand that the legal process isn’t over, and we are committed to keeping our customers informed as this unfolds.”

Is It Over?

For now, it remains unclear whether the decision immediately halts enforcement of the ammo check law. Ammunition Depot and CRPA have pledged to keep the public informed once the court issues its final mandate.

California could request an “en banc” rehearing by a larger panel of 9th Circuit judges, or it could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. But for now, the permanent injunction stands—meaning the law is dead unless higher courts step in.

Why it matters:

If you can’t get ammo, your gun is useless. This ruling restores a critical part of the right to keep and bear arms and sets a powerful precedent for other states trying to push similar schemes. It also shows that Bruen is reshaping the legal battlefield—putting the burden back on the government to justify its gun laws, not on the people to beg for their rights.

Stay tuned to AmmoLand News and CRPA for updates as the fight continues.

California Judge Hears Case on Ammo Law, More Gun Control Cases to Follow

California AG Rob Bonta’s Nickel-&-Diming of 2nd Amendment Rights