The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division (and its Second Amendment Section) have filed a brand new lawsuit against the District of Columbia’s Metropolitan Police Department over D.C.’s ban on so-called assault weapons, asserting that the prohibition runs afoul of the right to keep and bear arms.
The DOJ has previously argued against Illinois’ ban on a vast swath of semi-automatic rifles, shotguns, and even some pistols; participating in oral arguments before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this year. Today’s lawsuit, however, is the first time that the DOJ has filed a complaint of its own regarding bans on so-called assault weapons.
In a press release, Attorney General Pam Bondi declared that the lawsuit “underscores our ironclad commitment to protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans,” adding, “Washington, DC’s ban on some of America’s most popular firearms is an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment — living in our nation’s capital should not preclude law-abiding citizens from exercising their fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”
Civil Rights Division chief and Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon says the Second Amendment Section “filed this lawsuit to ensure that the very rights D.C. resident Mr. Heller secured 17 years ago are enforced today — and that all law-abiding citizens seeking to own protected firearms for lawful purposes may do so.”
In the complaint, DOJ alleges that the District’s gun ban “denies law-abiding citizens the ability to register awide variety of commonly used semi-automatic firearms, such as the Colt AR-15 series rifles, which is among the most popular of firearms in America, and a variety of other semi-automatic rifles and pistols that are in common use.”
Indeed, D.C’s current semi-automatic firearms prohibition that bans manycommonly used pistols, rifles or shotguns is based on little more than cosmetics,appearance, or the ability to attach accessories, and fails to take into account whether the prohibited weapon is “in common use today” or that law-abiding citizens may use these weapons for lawful purposes protected by the Second Amendment. See Heller, 554 U.S.3 at 47. Therefore, the District’s restrictions lack legal basis.
The lawsuit notes that possession of a banned firearm is punishable by up to one year in jail and a $2,500 fine, and that the Metropolitan Police Department “routinely” arrests individuals simply for possessing firearms that are perfectly legal in the vast majority of states.
DOJ is seeking a judicial declaration that D.C. officials are “engaged in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States in violation of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994”, as well as declarations that the “pattern and practice by DC Defendants of prohibiting registration of the AR-15 by law-abiding citizens violates the Second8 Amendment.”
Additionally, the DOJ is seeking:
A declaration that the pattern and practice by DC Defendants of prohibiting registration of all other firearms without an automatic firing mechanism and otherwise protected under the Second Amendment that law-abiding citizens possess violates the Second Amendment; A permanent injunction prohibiting all DC Defendants from arresting and levying fines against otherwise law-abiding citizens for possessing the AR-15 and all other firearms protected by the Second Amendment and being possessed or used for lawful purposes; A permanent injunction requiring all DC Defendants within a reasonable period of time to enable and allow the registration of firearms protected under the Second1 Amendment by law-abiding citizens.
With several “assault weapon” cases close to Supreme Court review (and a challenge to Cook County, Illinois’s ban already up for consideration in conference), it’s quite possible that SCOTUS will address this issue before the DOJ’s lawsuit is resolved. Today’s action is an important signal to the Court that the Trump administration believes its time to settle this debate once and for all, and to rightfully conclude that bans on commonly-owned firearms like the AR-15 and other modern sporting rifles are a clear violation of our right to keep and bear arms.
Today’s lawsuit also follows last week’s announcement that the Second Amendment Section is suing the U.S. Virgin Islands over its lengthy delays in processing permits, its gun storage requirement, and the warrantless searches that gun owners are subjected to by the Virgin Islands Police Department to prove they’re in compliance with the storage mandate. Two lawsuits in two weeks is a great start by the Second Amendment Section, and I’m very curious to see where the section’s attorneys will turn next in their efforts to dismantle unconstitutional gun control laws at the state and local level.
Editor’s Note: Christmas is coming a little early here at Bearing Arms!
For a limited time, use the promo code MERRY74 for 74% off a VIP, VIP Gold, or VIP Platinum membership when you sign up! It’s our way of saying thanks for your support in our mission to bring you the latest Second Amendment news, information, and informed opinion from across the country.
Read the full article here
