BREAKING: May 14, 2019 - U.S. Supreme Court Brief:
- FPC, FPF, and CGF argue that the "Constitution itself has done the categorizing and those rights covered ‘shall not be infringed.’ Period," and that so-called “tiers” of scrutiny used by courts are a “wholly judicial invention” that “should be viewed with skepticism when applied to conduct directly protected by the constitutional text.”
- Related news release HERE
Our amazing members & generous donors make our legal action and lawsuits possible.
Some FPC / FPF Legal Action efforts
- This case is a federal constitutional challenge to New Jersey statutes and Attorney General Gurbir Grewal's Orwellian and tyrannical enforcement practices, including a threat of prosecution about CodeIsFreeSpeech.com
- FPC v. Whitaker, et al. is a federal constitutional, statutory, and APA challenge to the DOJ/ATF ban on "bump-stock" devices
- Guedes, et al. v. Whitaker, et al. is a federal APA and constitutional challenge to the DOJ/ATF's ban on "bump-stock" devices
- Linton v. Becerra is a federal Second Amendment, Full Faith and Credit, Privileges and Immunities, and Fourteenth Amendment constitutional challenge to the State's laws and policies that prevent people who had their firearm rights restored in other states from possessing and purchasing firearms and ammunition in California.
Van Nieuwenhuyzen, et al. v. Riverside, CA Sheriff Stanley Sniff, et al.
- Van Nieuwenhuyzen, et al. v. Riverside, CA Sheriff Stanley Sniff, et al. was a federal Second and Fourteenth Amendment constitutional challenge to Riverside County's and former Sheriff Stanley Sniff's unconstitutional policies and practices that prevented some people from applying for and being approved for a carry license (CCW) on the basis of citizenship.
- May 24, 2019 - VICTORY! United States District Judge Dean D. Pregerson entered an order permanently enjoining Riverside County, CA from having a policy and practice of preventing legal U.S. residents from exercising their right to apply for a carry license
- Sharp, et al. v. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, et al. is a constitutional challenge to the DOJ's defective "bullet button assault weapon" registration system that prevented many Californians from registering their firearms before July 1, 2018, thus denying them exemption from many serious criminal laws, and a petition for writ of mandate to require the DOJ to register their firearms as many individuals intended to do before July 1.
- Carlton v. Healey is a lawsuit to challenge to Attorney General Maura Healey's total denial of access to public records about "3D printed guns" (AG's term).
FPC, FPF Comment in Opposition to ATF's Proposed "Bump-Stock" Ban Rulemaking (docket no. 17R-22)
- Attorneys for Firearms Policy Coalition and Firearms Policy Foundation submitted over 900 pages of analysis and supporting exhibits, including a video that shows the actual operation of a “bump-stock-device” on an AR-15 type firearm, in an extensive opposition that shows the Trump Administration’s illegal proposed ban fails every test.
- Federal lawsuit challenging the school district's and Kendyl Depoali Middle School's ban on wearing pro-gun rights FPC tee shirts and overbroad dress code policy banning pro-gun rights free speech
- VICTORY! Secured a judgment against the school district, wherein they admitted to violating G.M.'s rights, and payment of $25,000 in attorneys fees.
- Constitutional and statutory challenge to CA DOJ's denial of access to DOJ firearm regulations
- Federal lawsuit challenging the State of California's confiscatory ban on "large-capacity" magazines
- Federal Second Amendment lawsuit challenging New York’s ban on Tasers and other “less-than-lethal” electronic self-defense weapons
- VICTORY! U.S. District Judge David Hurd declares ban unconstitutional, GRANTS Motion for Summary Judgment, ORDERS permanent injunction
- First Amendment “Tyrant Registry” free speech lawsuit
- VICTORY! U.S. Chief District Judge Lawrence J. O’Neill ordered a permanent injunction (matching the preliminary injunction).
Hulbert, FPC et al. v. Annapolis, Maryland Mayor Mike Pantelides, et al.
- Federal Second Amendment lawsuit challenging Annapolis, MD's ban on Tasers and other “less-than-lethal” electronic self-defense weapons
- VICTORY: Full repeal!
- Ninth Circuit
- Constitutional challenge to California Senate Bill 707, exemptions for retired government employees
- First Amendment challenge to California law banning use of Assembly video of gun control bill debates for political speech and FPC advertisements about Proposition 63
- VICTORY: U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr., issued a preliminary injunction!
- VICTORY: Settlement and fee recovery
- VICTORY: Full repeal! Legislature completely repealed the law.
- Brief filed at the United States Supreme Court in support of a Second Amendment challenge to California's handgun Roster and microstamping requirements that prevent law-abiding people from buying handguns that are in common use for lawful purposes throughout the United States
- Brief filed at the United States Supreme Court in support of a Second Amendment challenge to federal gun control laws that prohibit law-abiding people from buying handguns outside of their state of primary residence
- Ninth Circuit; right to bear arms outside the home
- Ninth Circuit; gun store ban lawsuit
- Being petitioned to U.S. Supreme Court
- Fifth Circuit; machine gun lawsuit
- U.S. Supreme Court; locked storage lawsuit
- Ninth Circuit; right-to-carry lawsuit
- U.S. Supreme Court; 10-day waiting period lawsuit
- Pennsylvania Supreme Court; 'Stop-and-Frisk of legal gun owners
In order to challenge unconstitutional, unjust, and undesirable laws, we need individuals to participate in our efforts as plaintiffs. Please click here or email hotline[at]fpchq.org to report possible civil rights violations or let us know you'd like to get involved in a lawsuit.