For more than a year, thousands of residents of Los Angeles have found their constitutional right to carry a concealed firearm effectively frozen in bureaucratic limbo. On September 30, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a landmark lawsuit against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD), accusing it of violating the Second Amendment by dragging its feet on concealed-carry weapons (CCW) permit processing. This showdown isn’t just about delayed paperwork; it’s about whether administrative activists can deny a constitutional right.
The backstory rewinds here to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which struck down “may-issue” schemes requiring a special showing (such as reasonable cause) to carry in public. Bruen held that any firearm regulation must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. In Bruen’s wake, many jurisdictions shifted toward “shall-issue” regimes, but California and many local governments have struggled—or resisted—fully adapting.
In Los Angeles specifically, gun-rights groups had already sued the sheriff’s office over delays and rejections. A previous federal court found that two applicants had endured a delay of more than 18 months, which likely violated their rights. That case prompted a preliminary injunction, which required some process changes.
Meanwhile, the DOJ opened a “pattern or practice” civil-rights investigation in March 2025, flagging evidence of excessive delays and alleging systemic infringement of Second Amendment rights.
At the heart of the DOJ’s complaint lies stark data. Between January 2024 and March 2025, the LASD received 3,982 new CCW applications. But astonishingly, it approved only two of them—and denied two others. The remainder were pending, withdrawn or otherwise unacted on.
The DOJ further alleges that the LASD takes an average of 281 days to begin processing an application, which is well beyond California’s 90-day statutory requirement for initial review. In extreme cases, applicants have waited over two years just for an interview.
As of the filing, 2,768 new-license applications were still awaiting action, with interviews scheduled as late as November 2026—some two years out.
The LASD, however, says it is doing better. They’ve recently reported that they issued more than 5,000 concealed-carry permits in 2025, including 2,722 new applications, and they’ve said they are issuing permits “at a significantly increased rate, contrary to the statistics and information cited” in the complaint.
Even if the pressure from the DOJ has prompted the LASD to begin issuing permits, there are still thousands of applicants waiting months for their initial interview.
“The Second Amendment protects the fundamental constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to bear arms,” said Attorney General Pam Bondi in a statement. “Los Angeles County may not like that right, but the Constitution does not allow them to infringe upon it.”
The DOJ’s lawsuit is crafted as a civil-rights enforcement action under its pattern or practice authority, a mechanism historically used to oversee police misconduct and other civil-rights abuses. The government argues that LASD’s “deliberate pattern of unconscionable delay” has functioned as a de facto denial of the right to bear arms.
On the defense side, the LASD has pushed back, arguing that the delays arise from underfunding, understaffing and a transition to a new online permitting system. The sheriff’s office also defended its improved issuance rate as evidence that it is not purposefully obstructing permit holders.
This case is far more than a local dispute, as it could impact licensing delays in other jurisdictions. By moving through the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, the federal government has effectively acknowledged what gun owners have long argued: delays in issuing concealed-carry permits can be just as damaging to constitutional rights as outright bans.
