Second Amendment Foundation Statement on Supreme Court’s Rahimi Decision

“…domestic violence is abhorrent and those who commit such acts should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law – for which a conviction would result in their disarmament through imprisonment.”

BELLEVUE, Wash. —— Today’s narrow Supreme Court decision in Rahimi failed to produce the damage the anti-gun crowd hoped for against Bruen. The Bruen decision remains intact and will continue to be an important building block necessary to continue winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.

None of the justices in the Bruen majority cast aside the test rearticulated in that decision which controls how Second Amendment challenges are to be analyzed. Additionally, the justices declined to adopt the Government’s preferred time period of reconstruction as the controlling era for which historical analogues may be drawn upon.

Rahimi posed a difficult issue for the Court to resolve. And while the Court may have arrived at a conclusion that society believes to be best, it did so in a manner that poses some inconsistencies with what Bruen demands. To be clear, domestic violence is abhorrent and those who commit such acts should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law – for which a conviction would result in their disarmament through imprisonment.

As Justice Thomas wrote “the question before us is not whether Rahimi and others like him can be disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment. Instead, the question is whether the Government can strip the Second Amendment right of anyone subject to a protective order – even if he has never been accused or convicted of a crime.” Stripping an individual of their Second Amendment rights, when they have not been accused or convicted of a crime, is not consistent with what the Constitution protects. Read more

GOA Reaction: SCOTUS Rules Against Second Amendment in U.S. v. Rahimi

“These restraining orders do not prove someone guilty of a violent crime, and they often are weaponized by attorneys and handed out freely by judges in divorce proceedings.

Washington, D.C. — Today, in a case that had been supported by Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), the Supreme Court of the United States frustratingly ruled that individuals deemed by a court to pose a credible threat to the safety of another may be temporarily disarmed.

Justice Thomas was the lone member of the Court to correctly apply the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment in his dissent.

Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, issued the following statement:

“It’s often been said that ‘Hard cases make bad law.’ And that’s why we argued in our amicus brief that ‘Unpopular cases necessitate the strictest adherence to principle.’ Frustratingly, the Court nearly unanimously ignored this critical piece of guidance in this ruling.

“These restraining orders do not prove someone guilty of a violent crime, and they often are weaponized by attorneys and handed out freely by judges in divorce proceedings.

“Zackey Rahimi is a dangerous individual already behind bars for real crimes – and that’s where he should be. However, this ruling will disarm others who have never actually committed any domestic violence. So for those people to lose their enumerated rights, even for a temporary period of time, is a disgrace. If someone is dangerous, charge them with a real crime, convict them in a court of law, and get them out of society.” Read more

SAF Sues Pennsylvania Over CCW Prohibition for Young Adults

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a federal lawsuit challenging Pennsylvania’s prohibition against allowing young adults aged 18 to 20 from acquiring a license to carry a firearm (LTCF) for personal protection. The case is known as Brown v. Paris.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. SAF is joined by three young adults, all who are SAF members. They are Taylor Brown, Shawn Palmer and Max Ness. They are represented by attorneys Joshua Prince at the Civil Rights Defense Firm in Bechtelsville, Pa., and Adam Kraut at the Second Amendment Foundation. Named as the sole defendant in the case is Col. Christopher Paris, commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police, in his official capacity.

“Our individual plaintiffs have no criminal backgrounds and would like to procure a LTCF,” said Kraut, who also serves as SAF’s executive director. “However, the state law precludes them from carrying firearms, whether openly or concealed, in public for self-defense. Yet, a look back at history reveals young adults between 18 and 20 were fully protected by the Second Amendment at the time of its ratification. Indeed, at the time of the founding, young adults in this age group were actually required to keep and bear arms.” Read more

Biden Campaign’s Response to SAF Ad Signals ‘Truth Hurts’

The Biden re-election campaign has launched a 30-second television advertisement touting Joe Biden’s gun control crusade, which the Second Amendment Foundation says is the president’s desperate reaction to SAF’s own national television effort showing him admitting he wants to ban modern semi-auto rifles and 9mm handguns.

“Our 60-second ad cuts right to the heart of Joe Biden’s lifelong crusade to ban the most popular rifles and pistols in the country today,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb observed. “Our message features his infamous remarks during a CNN Townhall program in which he admitted he wants to stop the sale of those firearms. Our message finally and forcefully reveals the truth about the Democrats’ gun ban agenda, and it hurts. While others have claimed they do not want to take away anyone’s guns, Joe Biden is right there on live television acknowledging their true intentions.

“Obviously,” Gottlieb continued, “our message, which has been appearing on dozens of cable networks encouraging people to join our legal efforts to stop Biden’s unconstitutional gun bans, is having a devastating impact on the Biden campaign, otherwise they would not have spent the time and money to create a response ad. No matter how the Biden camp tries to portray Joe as a compassionate leader, the whole country knows he is a gun-grabbing zealot, thanks to our advertising.

“In the wake of recent events,” he added, “President Biden will eventually have to acknowledge the greatest failure of his half-century of gun control extremism, the conviction of his own son in a Delaware courtroom, for violating the federal laws Joe fondly claims he shepherded through Congress. His gun ban agenda has failed to keep the country safe, and more importantly, Joe Biden has failed to uphold his oath of office to protect and defend our Constitutional rights.

“Biden’s campaign ad is a desperate attempt to distract the public from the truth we’ve been sharing for weeks,” Gottlieb said. “It won’t work.” Read more

SAF Amicus Brief Supports SCOTUS Review of Hawaii 2A Rejection

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court supporting Hawaii resident Christopher L. Wilson’s petition for a writ of certiorari in his challenge of the Hawaii state Supreme Court’s decree that individual citizens in the Aloha State do not have the right to carry firearms for self-defense outside their homes.

SAF is represented in its effort by attorneys Edward A. Paltzik, Serge Krimnus and Meredith Lloyd at Bochner PLLC in New York, N.Y.

“When the Hawaii Supreme Court brazenly declared in February that the Second Amendment essentially does not exist within the state,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “we were stunned. This declaration is so astonishing in its nature that the U.S. Supreme Court simply cannot allow one-tenth of the Bill of Rights to be arbitrarily erased. Hawaii is still part of the United States. It is not a police state.”

“The Hawaii court has reduced an established right protected by the federal Constitution,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “This is nothing short of open rebellion against the Supremacy Clause. Lawless judicial activism of such an extreme nature, if left undisturbed, would set a dangerous precedent that State supreme courts are free to tunnel below the constitutional floor of the Second Amendment. Read more

GOA, GOF Sue New Jersey Over Handgun Purchase Requirements and Restrictions

Washington, D.C. — Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation today teamed up with the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners to challenge the state’s onerous permitting requirements to purchase handguns as well as New Jersey’s arbitrary “one gun a month” law.

Under the purchase permit policy being challenged, New Jerseyans must jump through several hoops, including: Read more

SAF Files Federal Lawsuit Challenging Post Office Gun Ban

BELLEVUE, Wash. —— The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a federal lawsuit in Texas challenging the ban on firearms carry in U.S. Post Offices and on postal property as violations of the Second Amendment, and is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.

Joining SAF is the Firearms Policy Coalition and two private citizens, Gavin Pate and George Mandry, both Texas residents. Named as the sole defendant is Attorney General Merrick Garland, in his official capacity. The complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division. Read more

SAF Hails SCOTUS Ruling on Bump Stocks: ‘ATF Can’t Rewrite Law’

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) is hailing the U.S. Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a machinegun, and that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) exceeded its authority by issuing a rule that classified the device as a machinegun. The case is known as Garland v. Cargill.

“This is a significant victory for gun owners because it reminds the ATF it simply cannot rewrite federal law,” said SAF Founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The agency has just been reminded that it can only enforce the law, not usurp the authority of Congress.”

Writing for the majority, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas observed, “We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a ‘machinegun’ because it cannot fire more than one shot ‘by a single function of the trigger.’ And, even if it could, it would not do so ‘automatically.’ ATF therefore exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a Rule that classifies bump stocks as machineguns.” Read more

GOA, GOF Victory: SCOTUS Overturns 2018 Ban on Bump Stocks

Friday, in a case fully supported by Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the ATF’s 2018 ban on bump stocks. GOA had filed an amicus brief with the high court in this case, and previously filed their own separate challenge to the ban after meetings with the Trump Administration and lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill failed.

This onerous attempt by the ATF to re-classify bump stocks as machineguns was a clear misreading of the underlying federal law, as emphasized by the Justices in today’s opinion.

Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, issued the following statement:

“Today the Justices made crystal clear that the ATF went well beyond their statutory authority in promulgating this rule. While it’s a shame it took six years to right this wrong, GOA is nevertheless proud to have fought back since Day 1. And we will continue to do so anywhere there is illegal and unconstitutional gun control.” Read more

GOA, GOF Help Secure Preliminary Injunction Against Biden Universal Registration Check Rule

GW: Here is yet another anti-constitutional maneuver foiled. Private citizens once again foot the bill to thwart government’s monopoly-money tactics.

Late Tuesday, Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) helped secure a preliminary injunction against Biden’s Universal Registration Check rule, which could require any person who sells just one gun in a year to obtain a Federal Firearms License and conduct background checks.

Under the judge’s order, the ATF may not enforce the new rule against members of GOA, the Tennessee Firearms Association, the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and residents of the States of Texas, Utah, Mississippi, and Louisiana.

The original rule took effect on May 20th, but GOA helped previously secure a partial Temporary Restraining Order blocking its enforcement against our members and certain other plaintiffs.

Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, issued the following statement:

“This is a massive victory for our members, and it comes at a crucial time. Before the rule even took effect, the ATF was involved in an early morning raid in Arkansas on a citizen’s home who was accused of not abiding by these rules, and ultimately, he ended up being killed. This Administration’s ceaseless aggression towards gun owners has already turned deadly, and the enforcement of this rule would have inevitably led to more unnecessary bloodshed. GOA and our valued partners will continue to fight back against this lawless and tyrannical administration.” Read more

1 4 5 6 7 8 143