Good ruling from CA US District Court
Opinion here. Some open carriers, complying with CA law at the time, were handing out leaflets. Two officers approached them, apparently made critical statements about their activities, handcuffed and frisked them, then ran a records request and a check on the firearms.
They sued under §1983, and the court here denies a motion to dismiss their First, Second, and Fourth Amendment claims, and motion to dismiss on grounds of qualified immunity. The only thing the City won was that they can't recover punitive damages against it (though they can against the officers, which in practice the City winds up paying), and one paragraph of the complaint (which referred to one of the officer's having been sued by a girlfriend) stricken.
"Plaintiffs allege that after Defendants checked to make sure that Plaintiffs’
firearms were unloaded, Defendants went beyond the scope of a permissible search by running
background checks on them and serial number checks on their firearms, as well as handcuffing
Plaintiffs, ordering them to get on their knees, and forcibly removing Plaintiffs’ wallets without their
consent. Therefore, Plaintiffs have properly alleged a Second Amendment violation."
hat tip to reader Alice B. ...