By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New— Biden Administration: trying to get HR1808 through the US Senate; The BATFE Frame & Receiver rule went into effect on August 25, 2022. Politics: Alaska’s open seat primary to be decided after August 31 when the second choice votes for the third and fourth place finishers will be counted; Florida and New York primary election results; Massachusetts primaries on September 6; Delaware, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island on September 13; State/Local: California: three bills are awaiting votes in the legislature; New York—Orange County Sheriff’s Office “has stopped scheduling fingerprinting” for required firearms’ licenses; Judicial: Andrews v. McCraw, challenging a Texas law denying 18 to 21 year-olds’ Second Amendment rights has been rejected by Judge Mark T. Pittman.
2022 Congressional Activity/Biden Administration
The BATFE Frame & Receiver rule went into effect on August 25, 2022.
The House of Representatives advanced HR1808, on July 25 on almost-party line vote of 217-213. Dave Workman covered the vote. HR1808 is the new “assault weapons” ban bill, that would ban virtually all ARs, AKs, AR pistols and even semiautomatic handguns and shotguns.
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.
Biden Administration: Reuters reported that “the administration is actively discussing with top Democratic lawmakers what support they can provide to push the bill.”
2022 Politics
Oregon Ballot Measure 114—An in depth article concerning the Oregon Ballot Measure 114 suggests that “shotguns could be in trouble” if the measure passes.
September 6th primary in Massachusetts.
Massachusetts: In the Governor’s race the only candidate with an A rating is Republican Geoff Diehl. For Lt. Governor’s and the Attorney General’s races all candidates are “F” rated or have a question mark by their name.
September 13: Delaware, New Hampshire and Rhode Island
Delaware: State Senate: Colin Bonini (16). State House: Bryan Shupe (36).
New Hampshire: NRA-PVF has endorsed Gov. Chris Sununu for reelection; Chuck Morse (R) for U.S. Senate; State Senate candidates: Jeb Bradley (3), Daniel Innis (7), Gary Daniels (11), and Howard Pearl (17);
State House candidates: Juliet Harvey-Bolia (Belknap 3), Mike Bordes and Dawn Johnson (Belknap 5-vote for 4); Glen Aldrich, Harry Bean, Gregg Hough, and Norm Silber (Belknap 6-vote for 4); Paul Terry (Belknap 7), Karel Crawfod (Carroll3, vote for 2), Brodie Deshaies and John MacDonal (Carroll 6 vote for 3); Ted Gorski, Linda Gould, Laurie Sanborn, and Kristin Noble (Hillsborough 20 – vote for 7); Elizabeth Ferreira and Tom Lanzara (Hillsborough 5-vote for 3); Melissa Black, Bill Boyd, Bob Healey, Mary Mayville, Maureen Mooney and Jeanine Notter (Hillsborough 12-vote for 8); Jeff Goley (Hillsborough 21-vote for 2), Joe Alexander and Fred Plett (Hillsborough 29-vote for 4); Jim Kofalt (Hillsborough 32-vote for 3); Keith Ammon, William Foster and Lisa Post (Hillsborough 42-vote for 3); James Mason and David Testerman (Merrimack 3-vote for 2); Jose Cambrils and Michael Moffett (Merrimack 4-vote for 2); Margaret Kennedy (Merrimack 8-vote for 3); Stephen Boyd, John Leavitt, and Thomas Walsh (Merrimack 10-vote for 4); James Allard (Merrimack 13-vote for 2); John Klose (Merrimack 14-vote for 1); Carol McGuire (Merrimack 27-vote for 2); Dennis Acton (Rockingham 7), Erica Layon, Jodi Nelson, Stephen Pearson, John Ptucek, Richard Tripp, Phyllis Katsakiores, David Love, David Milz, Katherine Prudhomme O’Brien (Rockingham 13-vote for 10); Tom Dolan, Wayne MacDonald, Sherman Packard, and Doug Thomas (Rockingham 16- vote for 7); Debra DeSimone (Rockingham 18-vote for 2); Robert Harb, and Charles Melvin Sr. (Rockingham 20 – vote for 3); Fred Doucette, John Janigian, Joe Sweeney, John Sytek, and Susan Vadecasteele (Rockingham 25 – vote for 9); Aboul Khan and Tina Harley (Rockingham 30 – vote for 2); Josh Yokela (Rockingham 32), Julius Soti (Rockingham 35), James Horgan and Joe Pitre (Strafford 1) – vote for 2); Fenton Groen (Strafford 19 – vote for 3); and Skip Rollins, Steven Smith and Walter Spilsbury (Sullivan 3 -vote for 3).
Rhode Island: The only NRA-PVF endorsement are in the State House races: Barbara Ann Fenton Fung (15). Natalya Delsanto (16), Camille Vella-Wilkinson (21), Edward Cardinal (42) and Robert Phillips (51).
On August 23, primaries were held in Florida and New York.
Florida: On the Democrat side—Val Demings will be running for U.S. Senate against Senator Marco Rubio (R), A-rated in past races; In the governors’ primary race Charlie Crist trounced Nikki Fried. Republican governor Ron DeSantis will be facing the winner of the election between Nikki Fried and Charlie Crist, both rated F. Wilton Simpson (R) with a B rating won the Republican primary for Commissioner of Agriculture. On August 15 Giffords announced that the anti-gun organization is opening Giffords Florida, supporting anti-gun candidates. Already they have endorsed Val Demings for US Senate, and Janelle Perez for Senate district 3.
New York: State Senator Peter Oberacker, Senate District 51 won his primary.
Alaska—August 16th primary: The special election on August 16 results are in: has been certified by the Alaska Division of Elections. In order of votes cast for first place the three candidates who will participate in the runoff are Mary Peltola (D), Sarah Palin (R), who was endorsed by the NRA, and Nick Begich (R). However, since Alaska’s voting is by ranked-choice and it won’t be until August 31 that all mail in ballots will be counted, and then the counting of the second choice ballots for the third and fourth place finishers will be counted.
State Legislatures/Local communities
The following states are still in session or in special session: California, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. New Jersey, Ohio and Virginia are in suspended session until September
Arizona: The Pima County Board of Supervisors recently approved by a 3-2 vote Resolution 2022-44, that calls for Repeal of Arizona State Firearm Preemption Statute.
California: The vote on SB918, “The CA Bruen Respond Bill”, legislation to “get around” the Bruen decision by expanding gun free zones, requiring signage for where law-abiding citizens can carry and other anti-civil rights provisions, can happen at any time. The vote could happen anytime from Aug. 29 on. It will need a 2/3 vote to pass it as it is to become effective immediately upon signing by Gov. Newsom. Currently there at 60 Democrats in the Assembly of 80 and 31 Democrats in the Senate of 40. However, amendments have been added over the weekend, so the bill will have to be voted in both Houses. Also up for a vote AB1227, an excise sales tax of 10% on handgun and 11% on long guns; AB2870, expanding the CA red flag law to include roommates, dating partners and family members (out to great-great-grandparents and cousins). SB505, requiring firearms owners to have insurance and be civilly liable for the misuse of the firearm, had been on the suspense calendar but was not considered and is considered dead for the session. However, California gun owners are now facing a breach of the state’s databases of gun owners making public the personal information of perhaps “hundreds of thousands of gun owners.”
- 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, A petition to against this county ordinance has been started on change.org. To sign click here. The County Council is on recess in August but It appears that this proposal is on a fast track for approval in September.
New York: Orange County Sheriff’s Office “has stopped scheduling fingerprinting for gun permit applications die to new law passed.” This notice was posted here on August 18, 2022.
South Carolina: Columbia—the city has submitted to the SC AG a proposed ordinance concerning the reporting of lost or stolen firearms to inquire if it violates South Carolina preemption law.
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. But according to the decision “only six States…have ‘may issue’ licensing laws.” On the other hand, several gun organizations including the U.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) believe that number to be as high as nine. The six that everyone agree upon are: California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. The remaining three are Connecticut, Delaware and Rhode Island. Several states, New York and California to date, have already changed their laws to try to maintain the ability to strictly control of who can “carry” a firearm outside the home. While on the other hand two states: Massachusetts and Maryland have decided to remove restrictions on carry permits.
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.
US Supreme Court (SCOTUS)
New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn (NYSR&PA) v. Bruen: —In the first gun rights case in over a decade—on June 23, 2022 SCOTUS handed down their decision in this case. By a 6-3 verdict Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the Second Amendment is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.”
Cases that were GVR’ed by SCOTUS:
Court requested supplemental briefings: Duncan v. Bonta the supplemental brief can be found here.
Dominic Bianchi v. Brian E. Frosh: the supplemental brief was filled on Aug. 22, 2022.More Duncan v. Bonta
is available.
Cases awaiting supplemental briefings: GOA v. Garland and Aposhian v. Garland.
In California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a “Legal Alert” to Local Carry-Licensing Agencies on June 24, 2022. The alert included the recommendation that “issuing authorities must still require proof that (1) “the applicant is of good moral character.” And it additionally states, “As a starting point for purposes of investigating an applicant’s moral character, many issuing authorities require personal references and/or reference letters. Investigators may personally interview applicants and use the opportunity to gain further insight into the applicant’s character. And they may search publicly-available information, including social media accounts, in assessing the applicant’s character. Finally, we note that it remains reasonable—and constitutional—to ask applicants why they are interested in carrying their firearms in public. As a result of this alert, the Firearms Policy Coalition sent a letter to AG Bonta suggesting that unless the alert is revoked, local jurisdictions following the recommendations will be sued.
In New York the legislature has gone to great lengths to ensure that Bruen does not allow civilians the Right-to-Carry guns. Cases are being filed against the 2022 firearms laws that were passed in July.
Vanchof v. James: challenging New York’s “assault weapons” ban, was filed in July 2022 and now all the defendants are writing letters about the plaintiffs’ standing and asking for a conference.
Paladino v. Bruen (7/11/22), challenging Section 5 of the law that “unconstitutionally presumptively prohibits Handgun Carry Licensees from carrying a concealed handgun on all private property in the State.”
Antonyuk v. Bruen challenging most aspects of NY’s new gun laws. It is likely that more such cases will be forthcoming.
Corbett v. Hochul (7/1//2022), challenging the required disclosure of social media accounts.
In Texas the case of Andrews v. McCraw a decision was announced on August 24, 2022 based on the SCOTUS Bruen decision. This case was initiated in 2021 against the Texas law prohibiting citizens who are between the ages of 18 to 21 “from fully exercising the right to keep and bear arms.” Judge Mark T. Pittman wrote that the Texas law that “prohibits law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds from carrying handguns for self-defense outside the home based solely on their age, this statutory scheme violates the Second Amendment, as incorporated against the States via the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Non-SCOTUS Federal cases
Cases filed in response to the NYSR&P v. Bruen
In California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a “Legal Alert” to Local Carry-Licensing Agencies on June 24, 2022. The alert included the recommendation that “issuing authorities must still require proof that (1) “the applicant is of good moral character.” And it additionally states, “As a starting point for purposes of investigating an applicant’s moral character, many issuing authorities require personal references and/or reference letters. Investigators may personally interview applicants and use the opportunity to gain further insight into the applicant’s character. And they may search publicly-available information, including social media accounts, in assessing the applicant’s character. Finally, we note that it remains reasonable—and constitutional—to ask applicants why they are interested in carrying their firearms in public. As a result of this alert, the Firearms Policy Coalition sent a letter to AG Bonta suggesting that unless the alert is revoked, local jurisdictions following the recommendations will be sued.
In New York the legislature has gone to great lengths to ensure that Bruen does not allow civilians the Right-to-Carry guns. Cases are being filed against the 2022 firearms laws that were passed in July.
Vanchof v. James: challenging New York’s “assault weapons” ban, was filed in July 2022 and now all the defendants are writing letters about the plaintiffs’ standing and asking for a conference.
Paladino v. Bruen (7/11/22), challenging Section 5 of the law that “unconstitutionally presumptively prohibits Handgun Carry Licensees from carrying a concealed handgun on all private property in the State.”
Antonyuk v. Bruen challenging most aspects of NY’s new gun laws. It is likely that more such cases will be forthcoming.
Corbett v. Hochul (7/1//2022), challenging the required disclosure of social media accounts.
In Texas the case of Andrews v. McCraw a decision was announced on August 24, 2022 based on the SCOTUS Bruen decision. This case was initiated in 2021 against the Texas law prohibiting citizens who are between the ages of 18 to 21 “from fully exercising the right to keep and bear arms.” Judge Mark T. Pittman wrote that the Texas law that “prohibits law-abiding 18-to-20-year-olds from carrying handguns for self-defense outside the home based solely on their age, this statutory scheme violates the Second Amendment, as incorporated against the States via the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Other Cases
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.
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.
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 what California’s AB2571 has done to 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.”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…”
Rocky Mountain Gun Owners has now filed cases versus the cities of Louisville and Boulder for their “unconstitutional gun control laws” after their case in Superior resulted in a temporary restraining order being issued against the town of Superior, CO by District Judge Raymond P. Moore. Both these lawsuits are against the towns’ ban on so-called “assault weapons.” Their website says they are “strongly considering a lawsuit against the City of Lafayette.”
New York Federal cases in opposition for the new NY gun control system (S.51001/A.41001). We anticipate many lawsuits being filed in opposition to the new overreaching NY gun law: Paladino v. Bruen (7/11/22), challenging Section 5 of the law that “unconstitutionally presumptively prohibits Handgun Carry Licensees from carrying a concealed handgun on all private property in the State.” Vanchoff v. James (7/12/22), challenging NY “assault weapons” ban as a result of NYSR&PA v. Bruen.
Cheeseman v. Platkin: A challenge to New Jersey’s “assault weapons ban” in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Miller v. Bonta: A motion has been made to the Ninth Circuit to lift their stay in the California “assault weapons” challenge.
Junior Sports Magazine, et. al v. Bonta: 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.”
National Shooting Sports Foundation v. Letitia James: This case deals with the enactment of a law to hold the gun industry civilly liable for “public nuisances.” NSSF filed this case on December 16, 2021.
Ban on firearms for citizens ages 18-21 in federal court
Andrews v. McCraw: This case was initiated on Nov. 9, 2021 regarding the Texas law prohibiting citizens who are between the ages of 18 to 21 “from fully exercising the right to keep and bear arms.” After the NYSR&P decision by SCOTUS, the judge asked the parties to file supplemental briefs, which both parties have now done.
Jones v. Bonta: Originally Jones v. Becerra. “The panel held that California’s ban was a severe burden on the core Second Amendment right of self- defense in the home.” Although California has not yet appealed to an “en banc” panel, this has been the manner in which the Ninth District Court of Appeals has upheld California’s draconian gun laws. We anticipate an appeal.
NRA v. Swearingen: On appeal to the US District Court in Tallahassee, FL oral arguments were held on March 24, 2022. The opening brief by the NRA was filed on August 17, 2021 before the US Court of Appeal for the Seventh Circuit. This is a case that deals with the age of majority. U.S. District Judge for the Northern District Mark E. Walker wrote a strange opinion in which he stated, “for better or worse” he was precluded from ruling any way other than upholding the law.
