As violent crime increases in Los Angeles, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) has taken action by filing a lawsuit against Los Angeles County. The DOJ claims the county is unlawfully preventing residents from protecting themselves.
This lawsuit represents an ongoing conflict between the Trump administration’s DOJ and the Democratic leadership in Los Angeles regarding public safety and constitutional rights.
The action, executed by the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, alleges that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office (LASD) is engaging in a “pattern or practice” that slows or denies concealed carry permits (CCW) for law-abiding citizens. Of over 8,000 applications reviewed, only two were approved. Some citizens reportedly endure waits of up to two years just to be interviewed. Critics are concerned, especially as crime—robberies, assaults, and carjackings—continues to rise in the city.
In a recent response, the office of Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass asserted that the city is experiencing its lowest murder rate in 60 years. Attorney General Pam Bondy defended the actions of the DOJ, stating, “Los Angeles County may not appreciate it, but the Constitution does not permit such violations.” She affirmed that the DOJ will consistently advocate for Second Amendment rights.
A spokesperson from the Sheriff’s Department claimed they are processing all concealed carry applications as per state and local laws. The spokesperson, Nicole Nishida, contended that the LASD CCW unit is approving permits at a rapidly increasing rate, contrary to claims made by the DOJ.
Moreover, attorney Hermeet K. Dillon, who is spearheading the lawsuit against the county, described the situation in Los Angeles as an anomaly, contrasting it with cities like San Francisco and Washington, DC, where residents obtain their permits in mere days.
“It’s like needing a license for First Amendment rights and being stalled indefinitely. The Second Amendment isn’t a second-class right,” Dillon remarked. She emphasized that expandingle access to CCW permits relates to safety, not merely constitutional arguments. “A well-armed citizenry could deter crime,” Dillon noted, suggesting that trained, responsible gun owners could effectively contribute to public safety.
Between January 2024 and March 2025, around 4,000 CCW applications were submitted in Los Angeles, yet only two were approved. Dillon criticized the delays, stating they undermine a fundamental right: “It’s outrageous. People wait years.”
US attorney Bill Essayri pointed out that residents in high-crime areas cannot afford to delay protecting themselves. “The right to bear arms is foundational to our nation, and it must be championed,” he said.
Dillon argued that despite California’s restrictions, responsible citizens should not be deprived of their rights. She shared her personal stance, believing she would feel safer owning a firearm for self-defense. When asked about addressing the backlog in applications, Dillon suggested that hiring more personnel could expedite the process significantly.
She recounted her experience obtaining a permit in Washington, DC, within six days after submitting fingerprints and proof of training, emphasizing how other jurisdictions manage these processes effectively.
Dillon admitted she hasn’t applied for a permit due to the extensive waiting period many residents face. She noted that only 4,000 individuals were explicitly mentioned in the lawsuit, as many citizens who lament the delay are often hesitant to apply based on anecdotal reports.
Representative Kevin Kiley from California echoed Dillon’s concerns, stating, “California faces some of the highest crime rates in the country. Every law-abiding citizen should have the right to protect their families.” He urged the LASD to collaborate with the DOJ to streamline permit processing.
Ultimately, Dillon reinforced the notion that armed citizens contribute to public safety, advocating for gun education and responsible ownership amidst rising violence.
