An Amish man from Northumberland County, PA, is suing the US government over the identification requirement to purchase a firearm, arguing his religious beliefs prevent him from being photographed, the Associated Press and LancasterOnline.com reported.
Andrew Hertzler, who the lawsuit says is an active and practicing member of the Amish faith community in Lancaster County, tried to purchase a firearm at a Pennsylvania firearms dealer in June using a state-issued non-photo ID. The sale was denied.
Hertzler said he wants to purchase a firearm for self-defense purposes.
The lawsuit points to the biblical passage Exodus 20:4, which states: “You shall not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.”
The lawsuit argues Hertzler could purchase firearms without photo identification by applying for a federal firearms license, which would allow him to sell, make, transfer and/or import firearms. However, it states he has “no intent to engage in the business of selling firearms.”
Hertzler had asked Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) for help, and Toomey contacted the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
In a letter to Hertzler, Toomey said the ATF responded by saying federal laws require photo identification when purchasing a firearm, and there are no exceptions to this requirement.
Hertzler wants the court to declare the photo ID requirement violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the Second Amendment. He also wants the court to prohibit the requirement from being enforced against those who claim a religious exemption.
US Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Acting Director of the ATF Thomas E. Brandon, Assistant Director, ATF Public and Government Affairs Christopher C. Shaefer and FBI Director James B. Comey are also named as defendants in the lawsuit.
The suit was filed in US Middle District Court by Hertzler’s attorney, Joshua Prince of the Prince Law Offices in Bechtelsville, PA.
“Mr. Hertzler confronts Hobson’s choice: either forego his constitutional right to keep and bear arms in defense of himself and his home, or violate his religion,” the suit read. Yet: “The exercise of one Constitutional right cannot be contingent upon the violation or waiver of another.”
“By knowingly and willingly sitting for a photograph, even for a state-issued identification document, Mr. Hertzler would be violating his religion by taking a graven image of himself,” the suit read. “Thus, Mr. Hertzler’s religious freedom has been substantially burdened—in order to exercise his fundamental right to possess a firearm for defense of himself and his home, the Government is requiring him to violate a major tenet of his sincerely held religious belief.”
It was just this outcome, Hertzler’s suit argued, that Congress sought to avoid by passing RFRA in 1993, which is also at the core of the recent Kim Davis controversy over gay marriage in Kentucky as well as other less publicized cases in other states.
The Amish have been fighting for religious exemptions for decades, losing some cases and winning some, most notably a 1972 landmark in which the Supreme Court held that they could exempt themselves from compulsory education laws on religious grounds. Whether Hertzler can prevail in his case will depend on whether a judge finds that his right to exercise his religion outweighs the government’s interest in requiring photo identification for the issuance of gun permits.
Hertzler is not the only Amish man, many of whom hunt, who wants to own a firearm, as stories about Amish in several states worried about photo IDs and their gun rights have shown.
