MS attorney defends Yazoo man in self defense case. Free. Learn more here and here.
This is NOT a paid advertisement.
The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit (Wrenn v. DC) in US District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging Washington, D.C.’s requirement that concealed carry permit applicants provide a “good reason” to qualify for a permit, in violation of the Second Amendment. The city and anti-gun Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier are named as defendants.
SAF, represented by Alan Gura, is joined by three private citizens in the case who have applied for District carry permits and have been turned down by Lanier because they could not “Demonstrate a good reason to fear injury to person or property.”
Their lawsuit asserts that “individuals cannot be required to prove a ‘good reason’ or ‘other proper reason’ for the exercise of fundamental constitutional rights, including the right to keep and bear arms.”
That seems like a slam dunk to me. After all, the Second Amendment doesn’t say you have a right to bear arms “if you can articulate to the anti-gun police chief’s satisfaction a ‘good reason’ before you might need them.”
The city is still appealing its earlier loss in the Palmer v. D.C. case, which struck down the city’s total ban on carrying handguns. The courts have not yet ruled on SAF’s claim that the city’s revised “may issue” law violates the Palmer injunction against the city’s original law.
I sometimes have my differences with the SAF, but they seem to be the only major organization pursuing these very effective lawsuits, while the NRA (with which I also have disagreements), for instance, usually either doesn’t get involved or is dragged kicking and screaming into them.
