By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New— Congressional: State/Local legislation: Colorado—Lakewood: Lakewood scheduled gun control proposals on Nov 28, 2022; Broomfield: package of gun control ordinances introduced; Colorado legislature: gun laws expected to be a priority in the 2023 legislature; Hawaii: Honolulu Bill 57 had its first hearing Nov. 29; Ohio: SB185 is on its way to the full House for a vote; New Jersey: lawsuit to stop state bear hunt filed on Nov. 29; Oklahoma: Rep. Jim Olsen (R) introduced HB1001, a bill to lower the age a citizen can carry a firearm; Virginia: Prince William County Board of Supervisors meeting Dec. 6 may be discussing gun control; Judicial: South Bay Rod & Gun Club v. Bonta: Judge Roget T. Benitez ruled against the state of California and a hearing is scheduled for Dec. 16, 2022; Miller v. Bonta: Judge Roger T. Benitez ruled against the CA Attorney General’s request to moot this case; NYSR&PA v. Bruen: Plaintiffs in the case have asked the District Court judge for $1,269,232.13 to cover the attorney’s fees and costs; Miller v. Atkins: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit just vacated and remanded this case on Dec. 2 to the US District Court for the Western District of Washington; Lawsuits against Oregon Measure 114 now total 4 as of Dec. 2, 2022; Bleuer v. Nigrelli: another church carry ban lawsuit in NY has been stayed; MSI v. Montgomery County: court conference Dec. 6, 2022 on request for TRO and Preliminary Injunction;Corbett v. Hochul: Motion for a preliminary injunction DENiED; Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Agency: case has been dismissed without any changes to hunting and fishing opportunities;Hawaii—Ninth Circuit—Oral arguments are scheduled for Feb. 14, 2023 for both Terter v. Shikada and Yukutake v. Shikada.
2022 Congressional Activity/Biden Administration
A lame duck session is still possible. Don’t put anything out of the reach of Nancy Pelosi with the assistance of President Biden.
During Thanksgiving week President Biden commented to reports saying,“The idea we still allow semi-automatic weapons to be purchased is sick. Just sick. It has no, no social redeeming value. Zero.”
H.R. 8460: A bill to allow BATFE to create a national firearms registry has been introduced. The bill would allow the government to keep background check information indefinitely. Additionally, this bill is a wish-list for the Biden Administration’s government increased surveillance power for this agency: eliminating BATFE congressionally imposed funding caps, allow other agencies to enforce gun laws; remove the legislated 24-hour maximum for retaining info from background checks, and make it easier to revoke FFLs.
H.R. 8534: A bill to create a nation permit to purchase, require firearms registration and allow confiscation;
H.R. 9183: A bill to “To facilitate the creation of designated shooting ranges on National Forest System land and public land” has been introduced by Congressman Blake Moore (UT-01).
2022 Politics
Oregon-Measure 114: There are now four lawsuits that have been filed against Measure 114.
Oregon Firearms Federation v. Kate Brown, Fritz v. Rosenblum, Eyre v. Rosenblum, initiated by the National Shooting Sports Foundation on Dec. 1 and Azzopardi v. Rosenblum, initiated on Dec. 2 that argues what gun writer Tom Gresham tweeted on Twitter:“Just got a call from a friend in Oregon. He said local gun stores plan to go out of business when Measure 114 goes into effect. It will simply end gun sales. Looking for the courts to stop this madness.”
State Legislatures/Local communities
The following states are still in session: Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio
The following states may prefile bills for the 2023 session in 2022: Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia
Dave Workman has an article regarding states that are considering anti-gun measures.
Alabama: Alabama’s constitutional carry law goes into effect on January 1, 2023. In a recent announcement, “The Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources said in a statement that ‘the state park firearms policy is consistent with current Alabama law. The state parks firearms rule will change when the new Alabama law goes into effect and will not require written permission or a concealed carry permit for handguns.”
Colorado—Broomfield: Last week the City Council moved its gun control package that includes a 10-day waiting period and proof of training, minimum age of 21 to purchase any firearm; banning “ghost guns”, banning open carry and banning concealed firearms in any City Council property. A second reading will be held in January 2023. Lakewood: The City Council of Lakewood proposed five gun control ordinances on 11-28-22 meeting. They proposed: 1.) Creating a 10-day waiting period for the sale of firearms; 2.) Raising the minimum age to purchase and possess a firearm to 21 years old; 3.) Requiring firearm dealers to post signage about the dangers of weapons in the home; 4.) Prohibiting guns in certain public places (open and concealed carry); and 5.) Prohibiting the possession of unserialized firearms, better known as “ghost guns bans”. According to the Colorado Sun “Gun policy could be the first big test of Democrat’s expanded majorities at the Capitol next year.” Laws to change the minimum age to purchase a firearm, gun bans, and waiting periods are possibilities.
Hawaii: Another public hearing in Honolulu County to set new rules for carry licenses was held on Nov. 29 on submitted Bill 57. More info on this bill can be found on the Hawaii Firearms Coalition page. In Hawai’i County, known as the Big Island, Bill 220, was modified regarding “sensitive places” and passed on a vote of 5-1 by the Council on Nov. 16. A summary of the bill can be found at on BigIslandNow.com.
Maryland: Montgomery County—Council President Gabe Abornoz introduced an ordinance, County Bill 21-22 to ban permit holders from carrying in “a place of public assembly,” After one revision on Nov. 15 the Council passed the bill on an 8-0 vote. It becomes effective as soon as it is signed by the Chief Executive. Mark Pennak, President of Maryland Shall Issue, said, “this will go into effect very rapidly and we’ll be moving in court, equally rapidly.”
New Jersey: The Bruen response bill, A4769, was passed by the Assembly on a 42-29 vote. Dave Workman has a summary of the Assembly passage. The Senate version, S3214, has passed the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee. And is currently before the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee. This bill bans carrying a firearm almost everywhere except at home, increases fees, uses prior speech and subjective standards to disqualify a person and mandates liability insurance.More bills: A4557 will be upgrading the crime of manufacturing firearms from second to first degree. A4717, has no text but requires psychological evaluation and in-home inspection prior to firearms’ purchase. S3003/A4502, expands sensitive places and S2847/A4369 prohibits possession of body armor.
Ohio: SB185, a bill guaranteeing 2A rights during an emergency, passed the House Government Oversight Committee. It has already passed the Senate and now goes to the House floor for a vote.
Oklahoma: HB1001, a bill to lower the age a citizen can carry a firearm, has been introduced by Rep. Jim Olsen (R) for the 2023 session.
Pennsylvania: HB2775, that would mandate a firearms eligibility license with mandatory training and added fees has been introduced. HB1929, that removes knives and switchblade knives from the prohibited weapons list, that passed the House 202-1 in April 2022, has now unanimously passed the Senate Judiciary Committee. It should now go to the Senate floor for a vote.
Texas: Anti-gun legislators have been busy prefiling bills for the 2023 legislature that starts on January 10, 2023.
Virginia:—Prince William County Board of Supervisors meeting on Dec. 6 may be discussing gun control according to VCDL.
State and Local Legal Changes as a result of SCOTUS decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn (NYSR&PA v. Bruen)
New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn (NYSR&PA) v. Bruen was a monumental decision for most Second Amendment supporters. Plaintiffs in the case have asked the District Court judge for $1,269,232.13 to cover the attorney’s fees and costs. More than $1,000,000 was the bill from Kirkland & Ellis, the law firm that fired their winning attorney, Paul Clement, on the day after NYSR&PA v. Bruen was announced. Clement and his colleague Erin Murphy have left Kirkland & Ellis and started their own firm to ensure that their clients still have representation. We are aware of at least three cases with Paul Clement as counsel: NSSF v. James that is now before the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Flanagan v. Bonta that is now before the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and Eyre v. Rosenblum, a case brought against Oregon Measure 114 by a group including the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
Judicial
Cases are grouped by court venue. New cases are added as they develop and some of these cases will be removed from this report if there is inactivity for a period of time. We will try and follow those cases that are active and impact the most gun owners.
Non-SCOTUS Federal cases
Cases being litigated or re-litigated in response to NYSR&P v. Bruen
New York: Second Circuit: the legislature went to great lengths to ensure that Bruen does not allow civilians the Right-to-Carry guns by passing the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA). More and more cases are being filed against the 2022 firearms laws that were passed in July 2022.
Christian v. Nigrelli: “A preliminary injunction, effective immediately from enforcing N.Y. Pen.L. § 265.01-d with respect to private property open to the public” was issued by Judge John L. Sinatra on Nov. 22, 2022. This case filed in the US District Court for the Western District of New York challenges the enactment of S51001. The suit states the State of New York “replaced one unconstitutional licensing scheme with another.” The case is being supported by the Second Amendment Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc. and two private citizens.
Antonyuk, et al v. Hochul:. This lawsuit challenges “various provisions of New York’s newly minted by ineptly named “Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA)”. It was filed on Sept. 20 and Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on November 6 issued a restraining order against major parts of the CCIA and denied the state’s request for a stay. The state of NY then appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, requesting a stay and appealing Judge Suddaby’s ruling.
Hardaway v. Nigrelli: After NY Judge John L. Sinatra, Jr. ruled on Oct. 10 that the section of NY’s new CICA making it a felony to possess a firearm at “any place of worship or religious observation” was unconstitutional, he granted a preliminary injunction stopping the enforcement of this part of the CICA. Another case that addresses guns in places of worship is Goldstein v. Hochul that was brought by a congregant and the Congregation of Bnei Matisyahu in Brooklyn, NY.
Corbett v. Hochul (7/1//2022), challenging the required disclosure of social media accounts. Motion for a preliminary injunction Denied.
Bleuer v. Nigrelli: another challenge to NY’s ban on carrying a firearm into a church has been stayed pending resolution of Antonyuk v. Hochul.
NYSR&PA II v. Bruen: The next iteration of the SCOTUS case—challenging the 2022 firearms laws.
California: Ninth Circuit
South Bay Rod & Gun Club v. Bonta: This case challenges the 2022 law passed as SB1327, that allows individuals to file civil suits against anyone who is involved in selling banned firearms or firearm parts. Judge Roger T. Benitez did not allow the state’s challenge to succeed and the case continues. A hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction combined with a trial will be held on Dec. 16, 2022.
Rhode v. Bonta: (This case began in 2016 as Rhode v. Becerra): The plaintiff is Kim Rhode, an American OLYMPIC medalist that very few of her fellow citizens have ever heard about. She has won six Olympic Medals in skeet shooting/double trap in six consecutive Olympic Games since 1996. Three gold medals, one Silver and two Bronze. She is also a six-time national champion in double trap. The issue is the 2016 California law that was passed by voters as Proposition 63. US District Judge Roger Benitez declared that the ammunition background check requirement for purchases violates the Second Amendment and declared it unconstitutional. However, hours after that decision The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted a temporary stay on the preliminary injunction by Judge Benitez. Thus all the restrictions on purchasing ammunition in California have been in effect for almost 5 years. On Nov. 17, 2022 a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has vacated and remanded the case back to the District Court for the Southern District of California to be revisited based on the Bruen case. A status conference is scheduled for Dec. 12, 2022.
Nichols v. Newsom: The Ninth Circuit vacated and remanded this lawsuit challenging California’s open carry ban. It returns to the Central District of California court.
Miller v. Bonta: The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has REMANDED and VACATED this case back to the District Court and a hearing on the motion for a Preliminary injunction was held on 11/28/22. On 12/1/2022 Judge Roget T. Benitez issued a written order stating that the lawsuit is NOT MOOT and it will continue. Briefs have been ordered for a hearing on 12/16/22.
Colorado: Tenth Circuit
Two different judges have issued Temporary Restraining orders to halt the bans on the sale, possession and transfer of commonly owned semi-automatic rifles in the towns of Boulder and Superior. After the legislature repealed the Colorado firearms preemption statute both towns banned so-called assault weapons. In two cases, RMGO v. The town of Superior and RMGO v. The town of Boulder, judges have granted temporary restraining orders (TRO) citing the Bruen case. In late August the city of Boulder announced it is not enforcing its “assault weapons” ban until it can “legally coordinate” with its neighboring jurisdictions. On Sept. 16 Federal judge Raymond P. Moore declined to combine four lawsuits that have been initiated in Boulder County and its towns into one. He commented, “If anyone thinks the district court is going to have the last say on this, they’re kidding themselves, Come on.”The City of Broomfield is reported to be considering 6 new ordinances with an effective date of Dec. 1. However, there have been no votes as of Oct. 21, 2022. The city of Longmont has postponed consideration of an “assault weapons” ban until June 2023.
Hawaii: Tenth Circuit
NAGR v. Shikada: A challenge to Hawaii’s Pistol Statutes was initiated on Mov. 18, 2022 in the US District Court for the District of Hawaii.
Illinois: Seventh Circuit
NAGR v. City of Naperville, IL: A challenge to Naperville’s assault weapons ban.
Maryland: Fourth Circuit
Maryland Shall Issue v. Hogan: Arguments before the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit are tentatively calendared during the Jan. 24-27 2023 session. This case was originally brought by Maryland Shall Issue in 2016 after the Maryland legislature passed a law requiring a Handgun Qualification License. The suit alleges that the Handgun Qualification License requirements, both as set forth in the statute, and as implemented by the Maryland State Police, violate the Second Amendment of the Constitution by placing unjustifiable and overwhelming burdens on the right of law-abiding citizens to purchase a handgun for the home. The current case which is before the Fourth Circuit deals with the Second Amendment challenge to the HQL.
Bianchi v. Frosh: This is a case against Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban law brought by the Second Amendment Foundation, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the Firearms Policy Coalition on Dec. 1, 2021 in the US District Court for the District of Maryland. It was dismissed on March 4, 2021 and was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. After the Bruen decision SCOTUS vacated and remanded the case back to the Fourth Circuit. It was reopened on August 1 and oral arguments have been scheduled for Dec. 16, 2022. On Oct. 31, 2022 the plaintiffs filed a supplemental reply brief arguing that the case should be decided based on the Bruen decision rather than remanded to a lower court.
Massachusetts: First Circuit
Morin, Alfred v. Lyver, William, et al was granted a writ of certiorariand then vacated and remanded it to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. This case challenges state law that denies anyone convicted of non-violent misdemeanors from purchasing firearms. Dr. Alfred Morin was convicted of a non-violent misdemeanor for carrying a gun in Washington, DC in 2004. At the time he was licensed by the state of Massachusetts to carry a gun. As a result of this conviction for which he did not serve any jail time, the state now bars him from obtaining a permit to purchase a handgun. Dr. Morin’s case has gone to both the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts and been appealed to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, both of which ruled in favor of the state. Now the Appeals court has been ordered to review this case in light of the Bruen decision.
Granata v. Healey: This case was brought in 2021 challenging the handgun regulatory scheme of the state. On May 19, 2022 Judge Rya W. Zobel in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts found that “the challenged regulations therefore pass intermediate scrutiny.” In June an appeal was initiated to the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Earlier this month the plaintiffs filed a Motion in the US District Court for Vacatur and Remand as a result of the Bruen decision. On October 11, 2022 the Court denied the motion for Vacated and Remand and the briefing schedule remains in effect.
New Jersey: Third Circuit
Mazahreh v. Grewal: was filed in December 2020. Judge Renee Marie Bumb (nominated by President George W. Bush) has ordered a permanent injunction against any requirement for applicants for handgun carry permits to show a “justifiable need” to do so.
Oregon: Ninth Circuit
Oregon Firearms Federation v. Kate Brown, filed in US District Court for the District of Oregon late on Nov. 18, 2022, seeking injunctive relief against the implementation of Measure 114. The current scheduling regarding Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction: Defendants response due 11/30/22, Oral argument set for 12/2/22 before Judge Karen J. Immergut.
Fritz v. Rosenblum: filed in US District Court for the District of Oregon on Nov. 30, 2022, seeking injunctive relief against the implementation of Measure 114. This case is being supported by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition.
Eyre v. Rosenblum: The National Shooting Sports Foundation announced on Dec. 1, 2022 that it was filing a lawsuit against Measure 114 on behalf of the firearms industry.
Washington: Ninth Circuit
Miller v. Atkins: The is case was decided in 2020 byJudge Ronald B. Leighton of the US District Court for the Western District of Washington in favor of the Washington referendum I-1639 and against the plaintiffs. It was then appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, then held in abeyance on June 6, 2021 until Dec. 2022. The Court of Appeals just vacated and remanded the case back to the District Court as a result of the SCOTUS Bruen decision.
Other Cases
Oregon—Measure 114 litigation:
Oregon Firearms Federation v. Kate Brown, filed in US District Court for the District of Oregon late on Nov. 18, 2022, seeking injunctive relief against the implementation of Measure 114. The current scheduling regarding Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction: Defendants response due 11/30/22, Oral argument set for 12/2/22 before Judge Karen J. Immergut.
Fritz v. Rosenblum: filed filed in US District Court for the District of Oregon on Nov. 30, 2022, seeking injunctive relief against the implementation of Measure 114. This case is being supported by the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Policy Coalition.
Eyre v. Rosenblum: The National Shooting Sports Foundation announced on Dec. 1, 2022 that it was filing a lawsuit against Measure 114 on behalf of the firearms industry.
Azzopardi v. Rosenblum: filed on Dec. 2 by FPC alleging that on Dec. 8 2022 all firearms sales in Oregon will not be able to proceed as a result of the passage and implementation of Measure 114.
Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Agency: Under the Trump Administration the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service opened more that 2.3 million acres on 106 National Wildlife Refuges and National Fish Hatcheries to hunting and fishing opportunities in 2020. As a result, the Center for Biological Diversity sued the Fish & Wildlife Service on November 28, 2021 in federal district court in Montana. In early 2022 NRA-ILA, Safari Club International, Sportsmen’s Alliance Foundation and Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation filed a motion to intervene and dismiss this lawsuit. A settlement has been reached and the case dismissed, but the plaintiffs are resubmitting the petition to ban traditional ammunition of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
Teter v. Shikada: On appeal from the US District Court for the District of Hawaii this case concerning HI ban of butterfly knives is scheduled of oral arguments on Feb. 14, 2023.
Yukutake v. Shikada: On appeal from the US District Court for the District of Hawaii this case concerning HI registration laws is scheduled of oral arguments on Feb. 14, 2023.
MSI v. Montgomery County: Pre-motion conference with the Court on our request for leave to file a Temporary Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction Tuesday, 12/6 at 2:30pm.
Stickley v. City of Winchester: A lawsuit against the City of Winchester’s ordinance banning firearms in certain areas was introduced and the judge ruled that in public parks and at events was in violation of the 2nd and 14th amendments. The full lawsuit will continue.
VanDerStok v. Garland: Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a lawsuit on Aug. 11 challenging BATFE’s new rule concerning the treatment of “receiver blanks, unfinished frames or receivers, or 80% frames or receivers” as firearms in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. On Nov. 2Judge Reed O’Connor granted Second Amendment Foundation and Defense Distributed’s motion to intervene and then on Nov. 3 he granted BlackHawk Manufacturing Group’s motion for a preliminary injunction. Earlier in September Judge Reed O’Connor stated that the “definition of a firearm in the Gun Control Act does not cover all firearms parts” and granted a preliminary injunction to plaintiff Tactical Machining, but not to its customers and requested further briefing. US v. Price: In a criminal case where the two indictments against Randy Price were for 1.) possession of a firearm by a felon and 2.) altering the serial number of a firearm, Judge Joseph R. Goodwin found that the first indictment was constitutional while the second was not. The federal government only required serial numbers after the passage of the 1968 GCA.
Miller v. Smith: A lawsuit initiated by the Second Amendment Foundation prior to the Bruen decision that challenges Illinois law banning foster parents from keeping a gun in the home was updated with a reply discussing Bruen. The case is currently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Barris v. Stroud Township: A lawsuit initiated by Firearms Policy Coalition challenging Stroud Township, PA’s restrictions on shooting ranges.
Columbia Housing & Redevelopment Corp. v. Kinsley Braden: In the Court of Appeals of TN at Nashville,a ruling in favor of a tenant who had a firearm. The court ruled “the tenant’s private home…is not the kind of “sensitive place” where the government may categorically ban firearm possession.”
Marszalek v. Kelly: A case filed in 2020 bythe Second Amendment Foundation due to a backlog of FOID applications being processed due to Covid-19 has been resolved and dismissed. “The issue was quite simple and we’re glad it is resolved,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “In 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic hit, restrictions were put in place in Illinois that caused the Illinois State Police to completely fail in its statutory responsibility to process applications for FOID cards in 30 days. However, the state was taking up to six months, and sometimes more, to complete this process, and the result was Illinois citizens were being denied the exercise of their Second Amendment rights.”
Defense Distributed v. Bonta: AB1621 that passed the legislature at the end of June 2022 banned the ownership of unserialized firearms (ghost guns). This case is challenging that law. The judge George Wu ruled that “AB 1621 has nothing to do with ‘keep[ing]’ or ‘bear[ing]’ arms,” thus denying the plaintiff a temporary restraining order.
Brandeis v. Bonta: In the Superior Court of California for the County of San Diego the judge has issued a Temporary Injunction Order against the law allowing the state to share private information concerning gun owners.
CRPA v. Glendale: New case brought by CRPA challenging city ordinance banning guns on city property. Hearing set for December 12, 2022.
Rigby v. Jennings: A challenge to Delaware bill HB 125, that became law in 2021, criminalized the possession, manufacture, and distribution of unserialized firearms, untraceable and unfinished firearm components. Judge Maryellen Noreika granted a preliminary injunction to prohibit the enforcement of most of this law pending the resolution of the lawsuit. Judge Noreika stated that the plaintiffs “are likely to succeed in their argument’ that the law violates the Second Amendment.
Nguyễn v. Bonta: A case filed by SAF and FPC in Sept. 2020 after the passage of California’s one-gun-a-month law. As a result of the SCOTUS Bruen decision, a brief, focused on “text and history”, was filed by the plaintiffs on Sept.16 at the request of District Court Judge William Hayes.
Nichols v. Newsom: Junior Sports Magazine, et. al v. Bonta: An emergency motion for a writ of mandamus has been filed. The Second Amendment Foundation, CRPA, Gun Owners of California, California Youth Shooting Sports Association and others are suing the state of California for the passage of AB2571 that was signed into law on June 30.“Plaintiffs bring this suit to challenge the constitutionality of California Business & Professions Code section 22949.80, which makes it unlawful for any “firearm industry member” to “advertise, market, or arrange for placement of an advertising or marketing communication concerning any firearm-related product in a manner that is designed, intended, or reasonably appears to be attractive to minors.”
Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island has converted their Temporary Restraining Motion to a Motion for a Temporary injunction against the 10-round magazine law that recently passed the legislature.
B&L Productions v. Newsom: B&L Productions (Crossroads of the West), California Rifle & Pistol Association, Second Amendment Foundation, Asian Pacific American Gun Owners Association, and others filed a lawsuit in federal court that challenges state Senator Min’s legislation, SB 264, banning gun shows by prohibiting the sale of firearms, firearms parts and ammunition at the Orange County Fairgrounds.
SoCal Top Guns v. Bonta: A coalition of groups that offer and promote youth-firearm safety, youth-shooting sports, and youth-hunting and hunter-education programs filed a lawsuit challenging a newly passed California statute that prohibits them from promoting those programs. An article in thereload.com demonstrates how California’s AB2571 is affecting the careers of Olympic shooters.
Morehouse Enterprises v. ATF: Seeking a preliminary injunctions against the “ATF from enforcing various parts of an omnibus rule scheduled to take effect Aug. 24.”That rule regulated unfinished, nonfunctioning firearm components identically to finished and operational firearms.This case has been joined by 17 states attorneys general.
Michelle Flanagan v. Rob Bonta: The County Counsel sent a letter to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit asking for the case to be dismissed as the case is now moot.The letter states “the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department is no longer requiring a showing of “good cause” in issuing licenses to carry a concealed weapon in public. This appeal now moot…”
Cheeseman v. Platkin: A challenge to New Jersey’s “assault weapons ban” in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey.
National Shooting Sports Foundation v. Letitia James: This case deals with the enactment of a NY law to hold the gun industry civilly liable for “public nuisances.” NSSF filed this case on December 16, 2021 and then in May 2022 Judge Mae D’Agostino ruled in favor of the defendant. NSSF has now appealed this ruling to the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Attorneys for the Appeal are Clement & Murphy.
