The Supreme Court has just ruled that governments cannot deny residents permission to carry a weapon in public – often called concealed carry – just because they don't meet some bureaucrat's demand for a "just cause" to be armed.

But now, according to a legal analysis, officials are considering basing their decisions on factors that make up a person's ideology.

Do you endorse any kind of "hatred," a wildly vague term, or do you endorse certain religious views? How about being anti-government, anti-abortion or pro-abortion?

It is legal commentator Eugene Volokh who explained at Reason that California officials are working on work-arounds to the recent Supreme Court decision, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

In that ruling, the justices vetoed the idea that a bureaucrat can demand a license applicant provide the bureaucrat's version of a good reason, or "just cause" for the license to defend oneself.

Volokh noted the California attorney general immediately released a statement that that state's demand for "good cause" likely could no longer be used against residents.

But the AG's office suggests that people who hold certain ideological viewpoints should be disqualified, he explained.

For example, the state already requires an applicant to be of "good moral character."