What California locations are currently designated as "sensitive places" where concealed carry is restricted?

1. The statutory baseline: SB 2’s “sensitive places” list and the promise of 26 locations

When Gov. Newsom signed the package that produced SB 2, the law set out a list of locations—reported as 26 in some legal commentary—where concealed‑carry licensees would be forbidden to carry, including playgrounds, public parks, museums, amusement parks, churches and zoos, among others; scholars and observers described the intent as creating bright‑line public‑safety zones separate from the traditional “may‑issue” discretionary licensing regime ^{[1] [2]}.

2. How news outlets have summed the list: parks, museums, bars, zoos, stadiums, banks and more

Major news organizations summarized the enacted prohibitions by naming a consistent core of place types: parks and playgrounds, museums, zoos, stadiums and bars or restaurants were explicitly flagged in Reuters and The Guardian coverage of the litigation over California’s carry rules ^{[4] [3]}. Local reporting and legal explainers have added amusement parks, churches and financial institutions to the roster, producing a widely circulated working list claim that a CCW cannot be used in these public venues ^{[1] [5]}.

3. The litigation complication: injunctions, Ninth Circuit rulings and contrary enforcement guidance

That statutory list has not been applied uniformly because federal courts intervened. District courts issued preliminary injunctions against some SB 2 provisions, and the Ninth Circuit’s combined opinions in May v. Bonta and related cases both affirmed and reversed parts of those injunctions—creating a patchwork where certain categories remain enforceable while others are temporarily or permanently blocked; state agencies like county sheriffs warned that SB 2’s sensitive‑places provisions were in effect pending further court orders early on ^{[2] [6] [5]}.

4. What’s been held unenforceable or contested so far

Sources tracking the litigation show specific categories were singled out by courts: hospital and medical facility bans, public transit restrictions, permitted assemblies and houses of worship were at times found vulnerable to challenge and were the subject of injunctions or reversals in the preliminary phases of the litigation ^{[6] [5]}. Media summaries and later reporting note the Ninth Circuit did uphold certain other sensitive‑place restrictions—news accounts explicitly list bars, parks, zoos, stadiums and museums among categories the appellate panel sustained ^{[4] [3]}.

5. What remains unclear to the public and why: enforcement, local conditions and future Supreme Court input

Because reporting and court rulings conflict about which SB 2 subsections remain enforceable, there is not a single authoritative public checklist universally accepted across law enforcement or by courts; county sheriffs issued guidance that SB 2 provisions were on the books as of Jan. 1, 2024, while appellate litigation continued to chip away at some restrictions ^[2]. Legal analysts emphasize that pending Supreme Court decisions and future appeals could reshape the constitutional test applied to “sensitive places,” meaning the list remains legally fluid and subject to further narrowing or expansion ^[1].

6. Bottom line for interpreting today’s landscape

The most reliable summary from the reporting is procedural: SB 2 created a 26‑item concept of sensitive places that includes parks, playgrounds, museums, zoos, stadiums, bars, banks, churches and certain government and medical facilities, but the enforceability of specific categories is uneven because of preliminary injunctive relief and mixed Ninth Circuit rulings—readers should treat published lists as provisional and tied to ongoing litigation ^{[1] [3] [4] [2]}.