The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a stay against an injunction on California's one-gun-a-month law, effectively blocking its enforcement. This decision follows a case brought by the Firearms Policy Coalition and others, who argued that the law infringes on Second and Fourteenth Amendment rights. During oral arguments, judges expressed skepticism regarding the state's rationale of preventing gun trafficking, with Judge Danielle Forrest questioning the law's efficacy against straw purchases. Judge John Owens highlighted potential self-defense issues, pointing out that the law could hinder individuals needing multiple firearms for protection. The ruling underscores a judicial trend emphasizing constitutional protections for firearm acquisition, as articulated in the Supreme Court's Bruen decision. California now faces a significant challenge in justifying the law's constitutionality in light of these judicial opinions.