BELLEVUE, WA – Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and fellow plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the California Department of Justice (DOJ) for arbitrarily delaying the state waiting period beyond 10 days during the COVID crisis have filed a respondent’s brief in the case, which is known as Campos v. Bonta.

The complaint was originally filed in August 2020. Joining SAF in the case are the California Gun Rights Foundation, San Diego Gun Owners PAC, Firearms Policy Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, Poway Weapons & Gear, Five Five Six, Inc., and three private citizens. They are represented by attorneys Bradley A. Benbrook and Stephen M. Duvernay, Benbrook Law Group in Sacramento.

The case centers around DOJ’s assertion during the COVID panic that it had the authority to extend the 10-day waiting period beyond what is allowed in state statute. In early April 2020, DOJ released a statement claiming that the statute gave it general authority to expand the statutory 10-day waiting period for all firearm transactions, up to 30 days. Citing reduced staffing due to the COVID-19 pandemic, DOJ “advised that background checks may no longer be performed during the initial 10-day waiting period.” DOJ allegedly delayed more than 220,000 transactions beyond the 10-day waiting period due to claimed administrative burden caused by pandemic staffing shortages. Read more

Second Amendment Foundation

12500 NE Tenth Place · Bellevue, WA 98005

(425) 454-7012 · FAX (425) 451-3959 · www.saf.org

BELLEVUE, WA – Attorneys for the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a long-running legal challenge of California’s magazine ban statute have filed a memorandum in support of their motion for summary judgment and opposition to the state’s counter-motion for a summary judgment. The case is known as Wiese v. Bonta, originally filed in 2017.

SAF is joined by the Calguns Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation and several private citizens. They are represented by attorneys George M. Lee at Seiler Epstein LLP in San Francisco and Raymond M. DiGuiseppe at DiGuiseppe Law Firm in Southport, N.C. The case is in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. Read more

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a legal challenge of New Jersey’s “sensitive places” concealed carry statute have filed a response to the state’s motion for a stay in the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The case is now known as Koons v. Platkin.

SAF is joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners, New Jersey Second Amendment Society and four private citizens.

Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Renee Marie Bumb granted a preliminary injunction and the state filed a motion to stay the order pending appeal. SAF opposes the stay, arguing the state “did not meet its burden before the district court, and it cannot meet it in this Court, thus a stay pending appeal should be denied.”

“The state is struggling with all its might,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “in a stubborn effort to retain a literal stranglehold on the rights of New Jersey citizens. We’re challenging the ban on legal carry in parks, on beaches, and at recreation facilities, publicly owned museums and libraries, bars and restaurants where alcohol is served, entertainment facilities, airports (before TSA security), public transportation hubs, and the presumptive ban on private property. Read more

BELLEVUE, WA – Attorneys for the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a federal lawsuit challenging Washington State’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” have filed a response brief in their effort to obtain a preliminary injunction. The case is known as Hartford v. Ferguson.

In their response brief, filed in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, SAF and its partners argue the ban is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and under Supreme Court guidelines set down in last year’s Bruen ruling.

SAF is joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Sporting Systems of Hazel Dell, and three private citizens, Brett Bass, Douglas Mitchell and Lawrence Hartford, for whom the case is named. They are represented by Seattle attorney Joel Ard. Read more

BELLEVUE, WA – One week after the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms called on Congress to block funding for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives pending a congressional investigation, Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst has asked the Justice Department to investigate ATF whistleblower allegations of waste at the agency.

“We are encouraged that Sen. Ernst has taken this action,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “Allegations of waste, mismanagement and unlawful employment practices by a federal agency cannot be taken lightly or simply ignored, and the public deserves some answers.”

Ernst, a Republican, sent a letter to DOJ Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz Tuesday in which she expressed concerns about the “limited scope” of actions taken so far to address the whistleblower complaints. She noted that the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) had alerted Congress and President Joe Biden about the complaints, especially regarding the wrongful classification of non-law enforcement jobs as law enforcement.

“The American people deserve to know the full extent of the ATF bureaucrats’ dishonest dealings,” Sen. Ernst wrote. “It is incumbent upon all public servants to act with the utmost levels of professionalism but when bureaucrats abuse the public trust it is the responsibility of watchdogs to hold the bad actors accountable for their malfeasance.” Read more

BELLEVUE, WA – Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a federal challenge of Maryland’s concealed carry law, known as “SB1,” have filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in U. S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The case is known as Novotny v. Moore.

The request for preliminary injunction asks the federal court to restrain “defendants, and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in concert or participation with them who receive notice of the injunction” from enforcing the prohibition on carry in museums, health care facilities and locations licensed to sell or dispense alcohol for on-site consumption, along with public transit and state forest lands.

SAF is joined in this case by Maryland Shall Issue, the Firearms Policy Coalition and three private citizens, all of whom possess “wear and carry permits,” including Susan Burke of Reisterstown, Esther Rossberg of Baltimore, and Katherine Novotny of Aberdeen, for whom the lawsuit is named. They are represented by attorneys David H. Thompson and Peter A. Patterson at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C., Mark W. Pennak at Maryland Shall Issue in Baltimore. Read more

BELLEVUE, WA – A federal judge in Texas has issued a preliminary injunction in a Second Amendment Foundation challenge to the Biden administration’s new “Arm Brace Rule,” granting in part our motion. The case is known as SAF, et.al. v. ATF, et. al.

SAF is joined in the case by Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Samuel Walley and William Green. They are represented by attorney Chad Flores at Flores Law in Houston, Texas.

Defendants are the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and Director Steve Dettelbach, the Department of Justice and Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. The complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. Read more

Vermont Govt Spits on Memory of the Green Mountain Boys: SOTGU Offers Precision Rifle Course for Citizens

Carbon County, Wyoming

The government of the State of Vermont became the very embodiment of the ruling class elitists that our Founding Fathers warned against when they passed a law outlawing “paramilitary training” within the state, thereby giving themselves the authority to censor your right to free speech. This flies in the face of Vermont history. If you listen closely you can hear the Green Mountain Boys turning over in their graves.

At Student of the Gun, we firmly believe that a firearm in the hands of a citizen should first and foremost be an Instrument of Liberty. We also hold to the founding principles of the United States to include the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights,

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”

To that end, we invite liberty loving citizens of the United States of America to join us for our High Elevation Precision Rifle training course held in the free State of Wyoming. We will put our money where our mouth is and offer a discount of 10% off the class tuition to each student who uses the promotional code: GreenMountainBoys or simply GMB.

For full course details, please go to www.studentofthegun.com/precision

—
Paul G. Markel

Host/Producer

Student of the Gun

(NEW ORLEANS, LA — Yesterday, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) released a statement on the Fifth Circuit’s Order granting an Injunction Pending Appeal in Mock v. Garland, FPC and FPC Action Foundation’s federal lawsuit challenging the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF’s) recent rule reclassifying braced pistols as National Firearms Act (NFA)-regulated short-barreled rifles. The injunction, along with other case documents, can be viewed at FPCLaw.org.

FPC challenged ATF’s administrative rule that seeks to reclassify “braced pistols” as “short-barreled rifles.” In so doing, the rule would transform millions of peaceable people into felons overnight simply for owning a firearm that has been lawful to own for a decade, unless they either destroy their constitutionally protected property or comply with the NFA’s onerous and unconstitutional requirements.

FPC has argued that the rule is a violation of both the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act because it infringes upon the fundamental and natural rights of the People. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief to secure their constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Per the the Fifth Circuit’s Order, “IT IS ORDERED that the appeal is EXPEDITED to the next available Oral Argument Calendar. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellants’ Opposed Motion For a Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal is GRANTED as to the Plaintiffs in this case.”

FPC intends to seek clarification as to who is covered under the scope of the injunction. Read more