by Judge Robert Summerhays of the US District Court of the Western District of Louisiana released his judgment yesterday in the case of Reese v. ATF. The case was a challenge to constitutionality of 18
U.S.C. §§ 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) which prohibited FFLs from selling handguns to 18 to 20 year olds. Reese was on remand from the 5th Circuit which had found in favor of the plaintiffs on appeal. The 5th Circuit found that this age group was part of “the people” for whom the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms was protected. Further, the 5th Circuit said the government had provided scant evidence of any founding era firearm restrictions for this age group.
The judgment found for the plaintiffs including members of the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Louisiana Shooting Association if they were members in 2020 when the case was filed. However, Judge Summerhays restricted the injunction on the ATF to only the states of Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas or the geographical area of the 5th Circuit. That, unfortunately, was not the worse part of the judgment.
Within twenty-one (21) days of issuance of this Judgment, those Plaintiffs identified at paragraph 2(b) shall provide to Defendants a verified list of their members as of November 6, 2020.
Requiring the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Louisiana Shooting Association to provide the government a list of their members is patently unconstitutional as it violates the First and 14th Amendment. The US Supreme Court found in National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449 (1958) that:
“Immunity from state scrutiny of petitioner’s membership lists is here so related to the right of petitioner’s members to pursue their lawful private interests privately and to associate freely with others in doing so as to come within the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment” and, further, that freedom to associate with organizations dedicated to the “advancement of beliefs and ideas” is an inseparable part of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The action of the state’s obtaining the names of the Association’s membership would likely interfere with the free association of its members, so the state’s interest in obtaining the records was superseded by the constitutional rights of the petitioners.
The bottom line is that there is no compelling state interest in the full membership rosters of any of these organizations. If proof is needed that a person under 21 but over 18 years old seeking to purchase a handgun is a member of any of these organizations, a membership card should suffice.
The organizations in question as well as other 2A organizations have come out with strong statements regarding Judge Summerhays’ judgment.
FPC called it “legally baseless and morally bankrupt” and promised an immediate appeal to the 5th Circuit. The Second Amendment Foundation attacked the ruling saying, “the scope of the injunction – who’s protected by it – is a population of people that is essentially zero.” SAF’s Executive Director Adam Kraut said, “And even then, they’re only covered if SAF discloses their membership to the government under duress. We’re currently examining our options in relation to the relief granted and will vigorously defend our members’ right to free association and privacy of such.” They go on to say they never have and never will give the government their membership list. The Louisiana Shooting Association has not released a comment on the ruling yet.
GOA on their X feed said, “This is inexcusable. Not even the Biden Administration ever attempted something so heinous.” In another post, they accused US Attorney General Pam Bondi of “creating a registry of gun owners.” Even NAGR issued a statement on X saying, “No Attorney General who claims to support the Second Amendment should ever demand that a gun rights organization turn over its member lists to the federal government, violating the freedom of association of both the organization and its members. It is beyond the pale and must stop immediately.” William Kirk of the Washington Gun Law YouTube channel contends the DOJ has just ruined a big win.
I will post more statements condemning this judgment as I get them.
