The Justice Department and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department have filed a proposed settlement that, if approved, would place LASD’s concealed-carry permitting operation under four years of reporting requirements and federal-court enforcement.
The agreement was filed on August 13 in United States v. Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, one of many affirmative Second Amendment lawsuits brought by the current DOJ on behalf of gun owners. It still requires approval from U.S. District Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett. The agreement does not become effective until the court approves it. If approved, however, LASD’s promises will become measurable obligations enforceable by DOJ in federal court.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department has agreed to end delays in issuing carry permits! @CivilRights will ensure that the terms of this agreement are followed in the years to come. We will always protect Americans’ Second Amendment rights.https://t.co/OJjrjB89TC
— AAGHarmeetDhillon (@AAGDhillon) August 13, 2026
Los Angeles Buried Carry Applicants in Delay
DOJ sued LASD on September 30, 2025, alleging that the department had effectively denied thousands of citizens their right to bear arms through excessive bureaucratic delay.
According to the federal complaint, LASD received 3,982 new carry-license applications between January 2, 2024, and March 31, 2025. As of May 8, 2025, it had issued only two new licenses and denied two applications. Another 2,768 remained pending, while 1,210 had been withdrawn. Those are allegations, not judicial findings, and LASD admits no liability under the settlement. But the numbers LASD supplied to DOJ showed a licensing system that had become practically useless.
The average delay before LASD advanced a new application to its next step was 281 days. The median was 372 days, while the longest recorded delay was approximately 1,030 days. Some interviews had been scheduled for November 2026—more than two years after the applications were submitted.
Government cannot use an administrative backlog to accomplish what the Constitution forbids it from doing openly. Bruen confirmed that ordinary, law-abiding Americans possess an individual right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home. A licensing scheme that leaves applicants waiting for years makes that right meaningless in practice.
Four Years of Reporting and Enforcement
LASD represents that it now complies with California’s statutory processing deadlines after adding personnel and installing new processing software.
California law requires an initial determination concerning disqualification within 90 days of a completed application. That should not be confused with the separate deadline for final approval or denial, which may depend on when LASD receives information from the California Department of Justice.
Within 90 days after judicial approval, LASD must file a declaration explaining how it achieved and will maintain compliance.
For four years, LASD must publish the minimum, maximum, and average time taken by California DOJ to return required fingerprint information. It must publish the same figures for LASD’s final written approval-or-denial notices and report the number of delay complaints received and resolved.
DOJ may verify those figures and request supporting records, which LASD must provide within 60 days.
If a dispute arises, the parties must first consult, provide written notice, and give LASD a reasonable opportunity to cure. DOJ may then ask the court to enforce the agreement. Individual applicants cannot enforce it themselves because the settlement expressly creates no third-party beneficiaries.
Delay Is a Second Amendment Injury
The most important development is DOJ’s recognition that excessive permitting delays are constitutional injuries, not merely bad customer service.
Anti-gun jurisdictions cannot evade Bruen by replacing discretionary “good cause” requirements with appointments, paperwork, and years-long queues. What government cannot prohibit directly, it cannot suppress through deliberate administrative paralysis.
If Judge Garnett approves this agreement, Los Angeles County will face four years of public reporting, DOJ verification, and a federal enforcement backstop.
This is an important victory, but gun owners should not mistake one friendly Justice Department for permanent protection. A future administration, and a very different DOJ, could abandon this enforcement effort just as quickly as the current department embraced it. That is why Congress must continue pursuing national constitutional carry or, at minimum, nationwide carry reciprocity. The right to bear arms should not depend on who occupies the White House or whether local bureaucrats feel like honoring the Constitution.
About Duncan Johnson:
Duncan Johnson is a lifelong firearms enthusiast and unwavering defender of the Second Amendment—where “shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says. A graduate of George Mason University, he enjoys competing in local USPSA and multi-gun competitions whenever he’s not covering the latest in gun rights and firearm policy. Duncan is a regular contributor to AmmoLand News and serves as part of the editorial team responsible for AmmoLand’s daily gun-rights reporting and industry coverage.
