By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New—Meissner v. City of NY: Brought by two citizens against the city for delaying the response to applications for a NYC permit; Rupp v. Bonta: This case challenges California’s assault weapon ban and was originally filed in 2017. On April 3, a Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order to Modify Pretrail Deadlines Motion was filed and on April 7 the Court made changes when it filed its order. Barnett v. Raoul: This case was brought against HB5471 firearms ban in Illinois that was signed into law in January 2023. The Plaintiffs have filed a reply in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction.
Lawsuits challenging Federal Agencies:
Bumpstock ban
Cargill v. Garland Case: 20-51016. The lawsuit challenges the DOJ’s classification of “bump stocks” as machine guns. The case was initiated in 2019 and the District Court ruled in favor of the DOJ. Then Cargill appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which decided on March 6, 2023, in favor of the plaintiff: The Final Rule’s interpretations of terms within the statutory definition of “machinegun,” which includes bump stocks and bump stock-type devices, are unreasonable and conflict with the statute. On April 4 DOJ filed a motion that it intends to petition the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari.
Lawsuits challenging State Laws
New York: Second Circuit: Five cases listed below were the subject of “expedited appeals” on March 20, 2023” by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.Three of the cases are appeals from Judges Sinatra and Suddaby’s orders for restraining orders, stays and preliminary injunctions. The fourth case, Gazzola v. Hochul, is an appeal from Judge Sannes’ denial of a TRO or PI: the cases are: Christian v. Nigrelli, Hardaway v. Nigrelli, Spencer v. Nigrelli, Antonyuk, et al v. Hochul, and Gazzola v. Hochul.
Other current New York cases in the Second Circuit:
Meissner v. NY City Police Department: A new case brought on March 6, 2023 by 2 individuals as a class action against the NY City Licensing division for failure to process their applications for firearms licenses in a timely manner. Meissner applied for a premise license and rifle license on Sept. 6, 2021, while Jonathan Zeron applied for a special carry license on June 23, 2022. Meissner received on license but cannot register either of his legally owned firearms, while Zeron has not received a license and neither has received any communication from the NYPD License Division.
California: Ninth Circuit:
Boland v. Bonta: After Judge Cormack J. Carney issued a Preliminary Injunction Order determining that the California Unsafe Handgun Act’s provisions…are unconstitutional in the Boland v. Bonta case, it took almost a week for Attorney General Raoul to announce that California will appeal to the Ninth Circuit. Boland v. Bonta: As mentioned last week California has appealed to the Ninth Circuit and on March 31 the Ninth Circuit issued a stay in part.
Renna v. Bonta: Following the PI in Boland v. Bonta, Judge Dana M. Sabraw issued a PI (preliminary injunction) against the California Unsafe Handgun Act’s provisions. Both cases have occurred within a 2-week timeframe.
CASES BEING TRIED TOGETHER in Judge Benitez’ courtroom and an opinion is expected to be published in April 2023.
Miller v. Bonta: On March 20, Judge Benitez ruled that (assault weapons ban) § 1021.11 of the California Code of Civil Procedure is unconstitutional. We can assume that this will be appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Duncan v. Bonta: (large capacity magazines) The state’s listing of all relevant statutes (their brief) can be found here and the CRPA (plaintiffs brief) is here. A summary by @KostasMoros on Twitter can be found here. This lawsuit deals with CA law passed in 2016 that banned the mere possession of magazines with over ten rounds.
Rhode v. Bonta: (ammunition purchase restrictions) Briefs have been filed by both sides as of Feb 21, 2022. The state’s listing of all relevant statutes (their brief) can be found here and the CRPA (plaintiffs brief) is here.
Other CA cases:
FPC v. San Diego: This another case against§1021.11 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. On the heels of Miller v. Bonta FPC is going after local jurisdiction that were not defendants in that case and are not directly bound by Benitez’s injunction. In this case the defendants include the following jurisdictions: City of San Diego, County of Imperial, County of Alameda, County of Ventura, County of Los Angeles, City of San Jose, and County of Santa Clara. The case was originally filed on March 2, and on March 28 a motion for a Preliminary Injunction, or Alternatively, for Summary Judgement was filed.
Wiese v. Bonta:This case challenges California’s magazine ban. A memorandum in support of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgement was filed on March 31, 2023. On April 3 Judge William B. Shubb set deadlines for motions with the final hearing to be on July 10.
Rupp v. Bonta: This case challenges California’s assault weapon ban and was originally filed in 2017. On April 3, a Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order to Modify Pretrial Deadlines Motion was filed and on April 7 the Court made changes when it filed its order. The court ordered: 1. The deadline to file dispositive motions remains May 26, 2023; 2. The hearing on the Plaintiffs’ Daubert motion is April 28; 3. The deadline to file motions in limine has been continued to August 4, and the Final Pretrial Conference is continued to September 1. A Daubert Motion was filed by the plaintiffs to exclude the testimony of Ryan Busse, a former gun industry employee who has been used by the anti-gun groups such as Giffords and Everytown. The motion to exclude Busse, filed by the legal team at Michel & Associates is interesting to gun owners.
District of Columbia: DC Circuit
Allen v. DC: In a case where the DC government revoked a carry permit, Judge Tanya Chutkan denied the DC motion to dismiss the Second Amendment claim that challenged the permit revocation.
Illinois: Seventh Circuit
Cases currently in the federal court system challenging the newly passed Illinois Public Act 102-1116 (HB5471), the new IL gun control law.: Accuracy Firearms, LLC et al v. Pritzker; Langley v. Kelly; and Barnett v. Raoul:
Barnett v. Raoul: The Plaintiffs have filed a reply in support of their motion for a preliminary injunction.
Bevis v. Naperville: A lawsuit against the city of Naperville’s assault weapons and magazine bans. This case is being appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and the plaintiffs have filed their brief.
Minnesota: Eight Circuit
Worth v. Harrington: Minnesota’s 2003 Citizens’ Personal Protection Act required applicants to be “at least 21 years of age.” In this case three plaintiffs under the age of 21 brought suit against their respective sheriffs for enforcing the Minnesota statute. Judge Katherine Menendez on March 31 stated that Minnesota Law requiring “a person must be at least 21 years of age to receive a permit to publicly carry a handgun in Minnesota violates the rights of individuals 18-20 years old to keep and bear arms protected by the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.” As of April 1 Judge Menendez put a hold on entering final judgement until the MN AG’s emergency order is ruled upon. @mnguncaucus tweeted the they will be filing a response by Wed. 4/5.
