41 results for 'cat:"Civil Rights" AND cat:"Firearms"'.
J. Suddaby dismisses the Second Amendment Foundation, a gun rights advocacy group with over 720,000 members across the country, from a civil rights lawsuit that claims a housing authority violates their members’ right to bear arms by prohibiting tenants from possessing any firearms as a condition of their Section 8 housing benefits. The court rules the advocacy group lacks representational and associational standing to bring suit under a 50-year legal precedent.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Suddaby, Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv1540, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Housing, firearms
Per curiam, the circuit finds that the district court improperly dismissed this challenge to Connecticut law banning firearms from being carried in state parks because plaintiff had standing to bring a pre-enforcement action since he stated an intent to carry his handgun to the park for self-defense, and nothing demonstrated that the state would refrain from prosecuting him for doing so.
Court: 2nd Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 23-1023, Categories: civil Rights, firearms
J. Staton grants the attorney general's motion for summary judgment and denies gun advocates' motion for summary judgment in a dispute over the constitutionality of California's Assault Weapons Control Act, a "law that makes it unlawful to manufacture, possess, sell, transfer, or import assault weapons into the state without a permit." There is no genuine dispute of material fact regarding whether "assault rifles are dangerous and unusual as a matter of law." The Assault Weapons Control Act is constitutional because either "assault rifles are dangerous and unusual and, therefore, not protected by the Second Amendment" or "assault rifles may be banned in accordance with this nation’s regulatory tradition of placing severe restrictions on dangerous and unusual weaponry."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Staton, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 8:17cv746, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, firearms
J. Lee finds that the lower court properly denied an individual's request to restore his firearm rights, which were terminated due to a sealed 2014 conviction for rape when he was still a juvenile. He claims that because his conviction is sealed, it should be treated as if it never happened for firearm purposes. Precedent states, however, that a sealed juvenile conviction continues to exist on the record as a conviction, thereby disqualifying him from firearm restoration. Affirmed.
Court: Washington Court Of Appeals, Judge: Lee, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: 57583-3-II, Categories: civil Rights, firearms
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Chen finds in partial favor of California on its challenge to new regulations from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives regarding ghost guns. The ATF issued a rule in 2022 that provisions from the Gun Control Act apply to some of the parts used to build ghost guns and expanded the definitions of frames and receivers, but California claims the feds were still not classifying many products known to be used as gun receivers and frames as firearms themselves. The AFT acted arbitrarily when it failed to consider how easily available certain parts can be outside of distributors and sellers, so the rules governing that issue are vacated. It is noted, however, that with that narrow issue decided, the vast majority of ATF's regulations on ghost guns are untouched by the ruling.
Court: USDC Northern District of California, Judge: Chen, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv6761, NOS: Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision - Other Suits, Categories: civil Rights, firearms
J. Mueller finds for the Attorney General of California on two individuals’ constitutional challenge to two state firearms laws that prohibit people from openly carrying firearms without permits. The pair fail to show the law is unconstitutional, nor do they support their argument the state cannot make them carry a weapon in a certain way. "This contention is unpersuasive for the simple reason that American governments have imposed restrictions on how people carry guns since the founding era, as the Supreme Court has twice held."
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Mueller, Filed On: December 29, 2023, Case #: 2:19cv617, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Constitution, firearms
J. Copenhaver grants in part the coalition's motion for an award of attorney fees and costs in its suit challenging the constitutionality of the 2018 "Parking Lot" amendments to the West Virginia Business Professional Liability Act that prohibits property owners from banning firearms on the parking lots of their premises. Following the Sept. 1 opinion finding the Inquiry and Take-No-Action provisions of the amendments "facially violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech," the Coalition is entitled to receive a total of $85,476 in attorney fees and in costs and expenses.
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Copenhaver , Filed On: December 11, 2023, Case #: 2: 19cv434, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, firearms, Attorney Fees
J. Cogburn partially grants a county sheriff’s department and a group of deputies their motion to dismiss a barrage of civil rights claims brought by a couple after their neighbor reported one of them for shooting his gun and saying he was going to kill everyone in the neighborhood. The couple had gone to sleep after the reported incident, but the deputies woke them up and shot into their home 15 times, hitting the alleged gunman twice. However, the department itself is not a suable entity. The deputies are also protected by public official immunity because, while they may have acted negligently in the course of their duties, none of them acted with corruption or malice.
Court: USDC Western District of North Carolina, Judge: Cogburn, Filed On: December 4, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv158, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, firearms, Police Misconduct
J. Kleeh grants the summary judgment motion of the state gun lobby group and two of its members in their complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging the constitutionality of the Bureau's restriction on Federal Firearms License dealers selling handguns to adults 18-to-21-years-old. The challenged statutes are "facially unconstitutional" since the government has "not presented any evidence of age-based restrictions on the purchase or sale of firearms from before or at the Founding or during the Early Republic" [or] "failed to offer evidence of similar regulation between then and 1791 or in a relevant timeframe thereafter."
Court: USDC Northern District of West Virginia, Judge: Kleeh , Filed On: December 1, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv80, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Government, firearms
J. Hurd rejects a legal challenge to New York State’s firearm licensing requirements brought by two state residents who were denied firearm licenses by a county court judge on the basis of past criminal histories, which they argue is a violation of their constitutional rights. The judge, who acted as a statutory licensing officer in this case, is protected by judicial immunity, their claim for declaratory relief is denied on the basis that they fail to establish the interests of the judge are sufficiently adverse to their own, and their claim seeking an injunction enjoining state officials from enforcing the regulations are barred under federal civil rights law.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Hurd, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 1:15cv658, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Constitution, firearms
J. Boyle denies a Second Amendment rights advocacy group, a firearms dealer and two gun owners' motion for a preliminary injunction in their challenge the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' final rule regarding guns equipped with stabilizing devices. Although the final rule is not a logical outgrowth of the proposed rule, they fail to show they are prejudiced and, therefore, have not shown a likelihood of success on the merits.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Boyle, Filed On: November 13, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv116, NOS: Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision - Other Suits, Categories: civil Rights, Constitution, firearms
[Consolidated.] J. Wood finds two of lower courts in these three consolidated Second Amendment cases properly refused to enjoin Illinois's laws regulating assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. These regulated weapons are not required for self-defense, and are therefore not protected by the Second Amendment. There is a long tradition supporting a distinction between weapons and accessories designed for military or law-enforcement use, and weapons designed for personal use. Affirmed in part.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Wood, Filed On: November 3, 2023, Case #: 23-1353, Categories: civil Rights, Constitution, firearms
J. Palafox finds a lower court mostly ruled correctly in convicting defendant of unlawful possession of a firearm as a felon. While defendant argues that prior gun laws are “now in question” following the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen, legal precedent around firearms has generally been “premised on the principle that felons had historically lacked Second Amendment rights.” However, a “clerical error” in the lower court judgment misstates the statute which defendant violated and should be fixed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Palafox, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: 08-23-00057-CR, Categories: Constitution, firearms, civil Rights
J. Dato finds that substantial evidence supported granting a domestic violence restraining order to an adult son whose mother threatened him. She repeatedly contacted him after he asked her to stop verbally and in writing, and the trial court was within its discretion to consider an out-of-state restraining order on the mother. Also, her facial challenge to the statute that bars subjects of restraining orders from possessing firearms fails because the constitution protects the rights of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms, and the trial court found she was not law-abiding. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Dato, Filed On: October 31, 2023, Case #: D081250, Categories: civil Rights, Restraining Order, firearms
J. Copperthite grants the U.S. attorney general’s motion to dismiss on an individual’s case challenging the denial of his state application for a “Handgun Qualification License.” While the individual, who seeks to buy a firearm for self-protection, has nonviolent convictions for driving while intoxicated and resisting arrest. The federal law that bans felons from owning guns is not unconstitutional as applied to him. The government has a legitimate interest in keeping weapons away from individuals that have been convicted of a crime that is punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Copperthite, Filed On: October 20, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv42, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Constitution, firearms
J. Gildea reverses the district court's grant of a motion to suppress evidence, including a firearm, discovered in a vehicle during a search resulting from a tip-off that the defendant had a firearm in his vehicle. An informant's statement that he had "personally observed a male in possession of a firearm inside a vehicle" sufficiently connects the vehicle to potentially unlawful activity to justify a search, and the informant was reliable and his statements sufficiently corroborated to establish probable cause.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Gildea, Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: A22-1073, Categories: firearms, Search, civil Rights
J. Ellington finds that the trial court improperly ruled in favor of the state in a declaratory judgment action brought by the individual challenging the constitutionality of a statute prohibiting him from possessing a gun due to his felon status for a health care fraud conviction. The Georgia Board of Public Safety denied the individual's application for relief. The trial court incorrectly found that the individual's statutory claim was barred due to sovereign immunity and incorrectly ruled that it could not reach the merits of the individual's federal constitutional claim. However, the individual failed to show that his conviction falls within the specific categories in the statute. Reversed in part.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Ellington, Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: S23A0699, Categories: civil Rights, firearms
J. Copenhaver grants in part and denies in part the Coalition's motion for summary judgment in its suit challenging the constitutionality of the 2018 "Parking Lot" amendments to the West Virginia Business Professional Liability Act that prohibits property owners from banning firearms on the parking lots of their premises. The Inquiry and Take-No-Action provisions of the amendments "facially violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech," as "the term 'any action against' is not defined, its scope is unknown and serves to chill any comment or conduct," and "property owners may certainly inquire into the presence of a firearm in order to prepare for and provide for the safety of their customers, employees and invitees and do so without intending to banish or discriminate against the possessor." The West Virginia Attorney General is enjoined from further enforcement of two provisions.
Court: USDC Southern District of West Virginia, Judge: Copenhaver, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: 2:19cv434, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: civil Rights, Constitution, firearms
J. Brown finds that the trial court must revisit defendant's Racial Justice Act claim that police showed racial bias during a traffic stop and search that revealed he unlawfully possessed a gun. The trial court should have stuck to the prima facie standard, which focuses on a defendant's proffered facts, not contrary evidence from police. If the claim survives the prima facie stage, then a preliminary hearing can be held to consider the state's evidence and make credibility determinations.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Brown, Filed On: August 30, 2023, Case #: A167311, Categories: firearms, Search, civil Rights
J. Renner holds that the trial court must reinstate a charge that defendant carried a concealed firearm in her vehicle. Under the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Heller and Bruen, the state's concealed carry prohibition remains constitutional even if state's firearm licensing statutes were found to be unconstitutional. So, defendant's attack on the state's licensing scheme could only show that other firearm prohibitions are unconstitutional, like the ban on open carry, while leaving the ban on concealed carry intact. Reversed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Renner, Filed On: August 24, 2023, Case #: C097229, Categories: firearms, civil Rights
Upon remand from the Ninth Circuit, J. Nunley dismisses two individuals' action challenging a $20 law enforcement gun release fee and an arrest for illegally possessing a slungshot. They fail to allege the gun release application process utilizes discretionary decision-making or that it was applied in an improper way, while they also fail to show the slungshot is a weapon commonly used for self-defense.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Nunley, Filed On: August 24, 2023, Case #: 2:16cv523, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Administrative Law, civil Rights, firearms
J. Aenlle-Rocha finds in favor of the city against the homeowner’s claim that the city’s officers unlawfully seized 10 firearms that the homeowner lawfully owned during their search of the homeowner’s property, as he unwittingly hosted a criminal there. The search warrant for the homeowner’s home was not overbroad, because the city’s officers had evidence of the criminal’s likely presence in the home and his history of violence.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Aenlle-Rocha, Filed On: August 21, 2023, Case #: 5:20cv1866, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, firearms, Police Misconduct
J. Chuang grants the U.S. Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss allegations of violations of a citizen’s constitutional rights when the department denied his purchase of a firearm based on a criminal background check. The citizen had previously been convicted of a crime with a prison sentence of over one year and had been committed to a mental institution two times in the past. Based on this information, when he went to purchase a gun at Dick’s Sporting Goods — a federal firearms licensee — his criminal and mental health background prevented him from purchasing one. Thus, the citizen’s argument against the department’s criminal background check lacks standing because the licensee’s test blocked him from getting the background check in the first place.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Chuang, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: 8:22cv1611, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, Constitution, firearms
J. Brimmer denies a gun rights organization’s motion for preliminary injunction against the Governor of Colorado because a new state statute will not injure it. The statute, to be implemented in October this year, makes it illegal for anyone purchasing a gun to obtain it until three days after a licensed dealer has performed a background check. The organization fails to sufficiently show how any of its members would be injured by this statute.
Court: USDC Colorado, Judge: Brimmer, Filed On: August 7, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv1076, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: civil Rights, firearms