Chip In $10

Below are links and information about some important lawsuits and briefs to defend and advance YOUR RIGHTS! 

We are truly grassroots -- our amazing members & generous donors make our legal action programs possible. Thank you!


Click here if you'd like to support pro-gun rights lawsuits & legal action programs!


SOME RECENT ACTIONS & BRIEFS

December 6, 2019 - S.D. Cal. Federal District Court

  • Motion for Preliminary Injunction (PDF, 44MB) in Miller v. Becerra
  • The motion, before Federal District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez, argues that “[i]n Duncan v. Becerra” – a lawsuit challenging California’s ban on so-called “large-capacity” magazines – “this Court recognized that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear common arms and firearm magazines that are useful for self-defense or use in a militia. . . This case is a logical result of Duncan’s analysis and seeks nothing more or less for the common arms that can use those magazines.” Further, the motion requests  “that the Court . . . preliminarily enjoin the [Assault Weapons Control Act] and Defendants’ policies, practices, customs, and regulations that enforce it.”

  • Related news release

December 2, 2019 - Maine Supreme Judicial Court (sitting as the Law Court)

  1. Can a person who possesses marijuana be determined to be "an
    unlawful user of or . . . addicted to any controlled substance" within the meaning of the firearms possession prohibition in 15 M.R.S. § 393(1)(G)?
  2. What effect, if any, does an acquittal on a charge of furnishing a
    scheduled drug have on the State's ability to establish that the defendant was prohibited from possessing a firearm pursuant to section 393(1)(G)?
  3. What is the test for evaluating the constitutionality of section 393 in
    light of the United States Supreme Court's decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S.570 (2008), and McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010)?
  • FPC argued that: 1) Federal precedent indicates that persons similarly situated to the Appellant cannot be determined to be “unlawful users of or . . . addicted to any controlled substance” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3); and, 2) The appropriate test for assessing the Section 393’s constitutionality is an examination of the constitutional text as informed by history, tradition, and public meaning.

November 12, 2019 - 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals

October 30, 2019 - United States Supreme Court

  • FPC Brief in Support of Petitioners (PDF)
  • FPC was joined on the brief by Firearms Policy Foundation, California Gun Rights Foundation, Second Amendment Foundation, and Madison Society  Foundation
  • Malpasso v. Pallozzi is a constitutional challenge to Maryland’s “good and substantial reason” requirement for a firearm carry permit

October 24, 2019 - United States Supreme Court

  • FPC Brief in Support of Petitioners (PDF)
  • FPC was joined on the brief by Firearms Policy Foundation, Cato Institute, Firearms Policy Coalition, California Gun Rights Foundation, Second Amendment Foundation, Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms, Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership, Madison Society  Foundation, and Independence Institute
  • Worman v. Healey is a constitutional challenge to Massachusetts' ban on "assault weapons" and "high capacity" firearm magazines

October 23, 2019 - District of D.C. Federal Court

October 2, 2019 - 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals

October 2, 2019 - United States Supreme Court

  • FPC Brief in Support of Petitioners (PDF)
  • Guedes v. BATFE is a challenge to Chevron deference and the Trump Administration's unlawful executive fiat ban on "bump-stock type" devices

October 1, 2019 - United States Supreme Court

September 23, 2019 - 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

  • FPC's coalition brief argues that so-called "large-capacity" magazines are inherent components of functional firearms, that such magazines are "in common use" for lawful purposes, and are constitutionally protected.
  • FPC was joined by amici individual gun owners: William Wiese, Jeremiah Morris, Lance Cowley, Sherman Macaston, Clifford Flores, L.Q. Dang, Frank Federau, Alan Normandy, and Todd Nielsen, all plaintiffs in the Wiese v. Becerra magazine ban challenge
  • FPC was also joined by amici Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF), California Gun Rights Foundation (CGF), Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), Armed Equality (AE), San Diego County Gun Owners (SDCGO), Orange County Gun Owners (OCGO), Riverside County Gun Owners (RCGO), and California County Gun Owners (CCGO)

September 4, 2019 - United States Supreme Court

  • Soto v. RemingtonBrief in support of petition for writ of certiorari (PDF); related News Release
  • FPC and its fellow amici filed a brief explaining that “the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms has always had a relationship to military use of arms,” hence the Second Amendment’s prefatory clause preventing the elimination of the militia. Indeed, throughout the colonial and founding eras, government mandated that most of the free population (often including women) acquire and keep the arms most suitable for militia service.

  • The brief provides the history and purpose of the PLCAA, and describes the decades of abusive lawsuits brought by anti-gun cities and states intended to bankrupt the firearms industry. The brief draws parallels between the abusive suits designed to destroy the firearms industry and the abusive suits brought by civil rights opponents throughout the Civil Rights movement, designed to destroy free speech in the Jim Crow South. Just as the Supreme Court halted the abusive lawsuits against the press in the 1960s, Congress enacted the PLCAA to end the abusive lawsuits against the firearms industry. 

  • FPC’s coalition amicus brief encourages the Supreme Court to restore the PLCAA’s protections of fundamental, individual human rights.

  • FPC is joined by amici law professors and Second Amendment scholars Randy Barnett (Georgetown), Royce Barondes (Missouri), Robert Cottrol (George Washington), Nicholas Johnson (Fordham), Joyce Malcolm (George Mason), George Mocsary (Southern Illinois), Joseph Olson (Mitchell Hamline), Glenn Reynolds (Tennessee), Eugene Volokh (UCLA), and Gregory Wallace (Campbell), as well as advocacy organizations Firearms Policy Foundation, Cato Institute, Independence Institute, Madison Society Foundation, and California Gun Rights Foundation (formerly The Calguns Foundation).

August 29, 2019 - United States Supreme Court (Petition for Certiorari)

  • Guedes, et al. v. Attorney General William Barr, et al.
  • Federal challenge to the government's unlawful ban on "bump-stock" devices
  • Petition for certiorari argues that the “Court should grant the Petition for three reasons: (1) the decision below conflicts with multiple decisions of [the Supreme] Court by elevating Chevron deference above the rule of lenity as applied to ambiguous criminal statutes; (2) the decision improperly finds Chevron deference to be unwaivable; and (3) the decision so grossly interprets Chevron deference as to raise the question whether Chevron should be overruled.”
  • Related news release here

August 15, 2019 - S.Dist. Cal. Federal District Court

August 8, 2019 - E. Dist. Pennsylvania Federal District Court

August 1, 2019 - United States Supreme Court

July 11, 2019 - Federal 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals

July 1, 2019 - Federal 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals

July 1, 2019 - District of California Federal District Court (Southern District, San Diego)

Jones, et al. v. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, et al.

  • Federal Second Amendment challenge to the State of California’s ban on firearm purchases by legal, law-abiding adults over the age of 18 but under the age of 21.

June 27, 2019 - Federal 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals

June 25, 2019 - Federal 6th Circuit Court of Appeals

June 21, 2019 - Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

  • Cato Institute and FPC file joint amicus brief in the appeal of U.S. v. Bronsozian, a case concerning a conviction for failing to pay a tax for a "machinegun" that cannot be paid due to other statutes, arguing that as the Supreme Court has repeatedly found, a tax must be a tax. For a government of enumerated powers to function, those powers must be clearly defined. The fact that a case involves guns—even unpopular guns—is not a reason to smudge the taxing power into a grant to do whatever the government wants.

June 17, 2019 - U.S. Supreme Court

  • FPF, et al. submit application to U.S. Supreme Court, Circuit Justice Roberts for extension of time to file a petition for writ of certiorari in Guedes, et al. v. BATFE (bumpstock ban challenge)

June 13, 2019 - Federal 10th Circuit Court of Appeals

June 3, 2019 - Colorado Supreme Court

May 31, 2019 - Illinois Supreme Court

May 31, 2019 - Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Commonwealth v. Hicks

May 14, 2019 - U.S. Supreme Court

NYSRPA, et al. v. City of New York (merits stage) amicus 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

MORE LEGAL ACTION, CASES, and BRIEFS

Folajtar v. United States Attorney General Barr, et al.

  • Federal Second Amendment constitutional challenge to federal lifetime ban under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) on firearm and ammunition possession/acquisition by those previously convicted of a qualifying non-violent crime.

Holloway v. United States Attorney General Barr, et al.

  • Federal Second Amendment constitutional challenge to federal lifetime ban under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) on firearm and ammunition possession/acquisition by those previously convicted of a qualifying non-violent crime.

Defense Distributed, Brandon Combs, Firearms Policy Coalition, et al. v. New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal

  • 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

Firearms Policy Coalition v. Acting U.S. Attorney General Whitaker, ATF, et al.

  • 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. Acting Attorney General Whitaker, ATF, et al.

  • 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, et al. v. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, DOJ, et al.

  • 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, DOJ, et al.

  • 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, et al. v. Mass. Attorney General Maura Healey, et al.

  • 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.

Guardanapo v. Washoe County School District, et al.

  • 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.

DeLuz, FPC, CGF v. California Department of Justice

  • Constitutional and statutory challenge to CA DOJ's denial of access to DOJ firearm regulations

Wiese, FPC et al., v. Becerra 

  • Federal lawsuit challenging the State of California's confiscatory ban on "large-capacity" magazines

Avitabile, FPC, FPF v. State of New York, Lt. Col. Beach

Publius & Hoskins v. Diane Boyer-Vine 

  • 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!

Gallinger, FPC et al. v. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra 

  • Ninth Circuit
  • Constitutional challenge to California Senate Bill 707, exemptions for retired government employees

FPC SADC, et al. v. California Attorney General Kamala Harris

  • 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.

Pena v. Horan Supreme Court (cert stage) amicus brief

  • 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

Mance v. Whitaker amicus brief

  • 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

Young v. Hawaii amicus brief

  • Ninth Circuit; right to bear arms outside the home

Teixeira v. County of Alameda amicus brief 

  • Ninth Circuit; gun store ban lawsuit
  • Being petitioned to U.S. Supreme Court

Hollis v. Lynch amicus brief 

  • Fifth Circuit; machine gun lawsuit

Jackson v. San Francisco amicus brief 

  • U.S. Supreme Court; locked storage lawsuit

Peruta v. County of San Diego amicus brief

  • Ninth Circuit; right-to-carry lawsuit

Silvester v. Becerra amicus brief 

  • U.S. Supreme Court; 10-day waiting period lawsuit

Potential Plaintiffs

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.