Livingston, et al v. Ballard, et al is limited to handguns, a dumb mistake. Even if Young prevails, there is no shortage of ways Livingston can lose. For example, in the Flanagan v. Becerra "carry" case, all but one of the natural born plaintiffs disavowed any intention or desire to openly carry a firearm in their deposition and there is no articulated, concrete plan by any of the plaintiffs to openly carry a firearm, anywhere or for any reason. The NRA/CRPA lawyers were so busy arguing that California can ban Open Carry in favor of concealed carry they either by design or incompetence failed to make their case about Open Carry in any legally cognizable way. As a result, the district court did not rule on an Open Carry claim that was not there.
Flanagan v. Becerra is the third NRA/CRPA concealed carry appeal. The previous two lost as will Flanagan. Livingston will no doubt add to the large number of concealed carry lawsuits lost in this circuit.