There have been some huge court decisions lately that effect every gun owner in the country that you should know about. Some of these court rulings are more than legal victories, they restore constitutional rights that the founders wrote into the Constitution and have been eroded away over time. Most of these rulings have been referred to as “A restoration of Constitutional Protections”, Protections that have been ignored by states and municipalities for decades. I am not an attorney, and nothing here should be looked at as legal advice, please do your independent research and make sure you understand the laws that are or are not being enforced before you decide to start carrying a firearm. Here are the big ten that you need to know about.
- Interstate Travel Protection – There have been federal rules about traveling with a firearm through states that may not recognize your permit or license for years. These rules allowed you to travel from a location that you legally own the firearm to another location where you can legally own the firearm, even if that meant traveling through an unfriendly non – 2A state (like New Jersey or New York) Police department would routinely arrest travelers if found with a firearm. Under the Court decision being referred to as the Federal interstate transportation Doctrine. The decision gives gun owners simply traveling through a restrictive state Federal immunity to prosecution. In addition, it allows absolute federal protection to travel with the gun as well as traveling with a loaded firearm (providing you have a legal permit to carry in your home state) which means that you can remain protected during gas stops, food stops and even hotel stays regardless of local laws.
- Private Property Fortress Doctrine – Court decision has stated that Law enforcement can no longer conduct a warrantless search of any property that you own (Home, business, vehicle etc) based solely on firearm ownership, possession or business activities. They must now acquire a warrant from a judge. an example of this is an unannounced compliance check on an FFL by ATF Agents or an unannounced check on a licensee by a police department to ensure compliance with their arbitrary rules. A warrant must be obtained which generally means that a crime must be being investigated.
- Ammunition Liberation – Background checks for ammunition have been found to be Unconstitutional. The DC Circuit Court has ruled that ammunition should also receive the same protection under the 2nd amendment as a firearm. They actually stated that “A firearm without ammunition is just an expensive club.” Owners must be allowed to keep their legally owned firearms functional by possessing ammunition. This means that background checks, permits to purchase ammunition, quantity limits and online sale prohibitions of ammunition are considered unconstitutional and violate the 2nd amendment.
- Business Licenses – Applies mostly to FFL holders. The 5th Circuit Court has stripped decades of overreach that keeps small gun stores or FFL holders from receiving timely licensing. It stated that the ATF (or other licensing agency) cannot create or use any arbitrary rule to prohibit or delay licensing. Any denial of licensing must have a clear and legitimate reason for the delay or denial. It further states that licensing should take place in a timely manner and stated that 60 days should be ample time to do a background check for a license.
- The Digital Privacy Shield – The 9th Circuit Court has stated that the use of Digital surveillance of gun owners is unconstitutional and violates the 4th amendment. The Government can no longer use cell phone data, internet searches, credit card transactions, ammunition purchases or social media activity to produce a profile of a gun owner and then use that date to target the gun owner for an investigation. Government agencies now need a warrant to search these types of data bases which means they must be investigating a crime, not merely looking for one. it further stated that states that are maintaining these data bases must not share them with Federal agencies as this now creates a federal data base.
- The Carry Permit Revolution – This decision was recently made by the Supreme Court. This decision makes broad restrictive licensing illegal. The denial of a license must be completed within 30 days, any longer is an infringement on your 2nd amendment right. There should be no subjective requirements to obtain a license. There is no more rubber stamp denials of licensing. They also stated that license fees should not exceed $50. Exorbitant license fees prevent individuals from exercising their 2nd amendment rights. Subjective rules, excessive wait time, and prohibitive fees transform a constitutional right into a government granted privilege which the constitution prohibits.
- The Registration Destruction act – The DC Circuit court ordered the Federal government to begin destruction of federal digital records of gun owners within 90 days. They stated that the maintaining of these records violates federal law. When Congress passed the firearm owners protection act, they specifically stated that no databases of firearm owners were to be kept. The ATF has ignored this rule since it was passed and would routinely change the name of a data base to get around the law.
- The Seizure Immunity Protocol – The Supreme court recently decided that civil asset forfeiture laws, property seizure laws and red flag laws violate the 4th amendment. They stated that the seizure of property, specifically constitutionally protected property like firearms by a government agency without a criminal charge and conviction violates both the 2nd and 4th amendment. This means that red flag laws across the country that allow the seizure of firearms without a criminal conviction are unconstitutional. The practice of temporary seizures of firearms by police during an investigation is illegal until a specific crime is charged and a conviction is complete.
- The Enforcement Accountability Hammer – This reverses qualified immunity for law enforcement officers who knowingly violate a person’s 2nd amendment (or any amendments) rights. This means that if they are sued for knowingly violating someone’s civil rights they would be required to pay any judgment themself, not the municipality that they work for. The court stated that “The possession of a badge does not give license to infringe on the bill of rights”.
- The Constitutional Carry Mandate – This may be the most consequential victory for gun rights in history. The Supreme Court established that requiring any license, permit or government permission to carry a firearm for self-defense is facially unconstitutional under the 2nd amendment. They stated that the requirement to gain a license or government approval for something that is guaranteed under the constitution creates a regulatory framework. This means all license framework, training requirements or government mandates to purchase, possess or carry a firearm are unconstitutional. The court established what they are calling the “Permit Abolition Doctrine” that makes one thing clear: If you can legally own a firearm, you have an automatic constitutional right to carry it for self-defense without asking anyone’s permission.
I can’t say when these court decisions will affect local, State or Federal laws regarding firearms, but you can bet the gun grabbers and anti-gun groups will try to fight any chances that make it less restrictive to own or carry a firearm. Protecting yourself is more than pressing the trigger. Learn the firearms related laws where you reside. Look into companies like US Law Shield to protect yourself legally. They have attorneys on call 24 hours a day to answer questions or come to your legal aid if you are accused of violating a law.