Court activity seems to never rest and neither do anti-gun extremists who want to deprive citizens of the right to bear arms. Here are updates on two court cases where NRA is involved and one on Missouri local officials who tried to usurp power from the state to push their anti-gun agenda.
Lawsuit Filed in Pennsylvania
In November 2024, the NRA, the Firearms Policy Coalition and two individuals filed a lawsuit challenging Pennsylvania’s prohibition on concealed carry by adults under age 21.
Pennsylvania generally requires an individual to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm or transport a firearm in one’s vehicle. Moreover, a license is required to be exempt from the “Gun-Free School Zones Act,” which forbids carrying within 1,000 feet of the grounds of a school—more than 3,000 of which exist throughout the Commonwealth. Adults under 21, however, are ineligible to apply for a license.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has already held that “the people” covered by the Second Amendment “presumptively encompasses all adult Americans, including 18-to-20-year-olds.” And, in the NRA’s 2022 NYSRPA v. Bruen case, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects the public carry of firearms. Therefore, the plaintiffs argue, Pennsylvania’s concealed-carry licensing scheme violates the Second Amendment by preventing adults under 21 from exercising the full scope of the right to bear arms.
The case, named Young v. Ott, was filed in the federal District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
NRA Filed Amicus Brief in Washington Magazine Case
Also in November, NRA filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of the State of Washington in a challenge to Washington’s prohibition on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
The defendants in the case are a retail firearms dealer and its owner. In 2023, the defendants were issued a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) by the Washington State Office of the Attorney General due to suspicions that they were selling magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, which were prohibited in Washington. The defendants petitioned for the CID to be set aside and a declaration that the magazine ban violates both the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 24, of the Washington Constitution.
On April 8, 2024, after the CID was withdrawn but replaced with a Consumer Protection Act enforcement action, the trial court held Washington’s magazine ban violative of both the U.S. and Washington Constitutions. But the Supreme Court of the State of Washington granted an emergency stay that same day, which was followed by another order from the Supreme Court Commissioner staying the case.
With the case going before the Supreme Court of the State of Washington, NRA filed an amicus brief supporting the retail firearms dealer and its owner. The brief argues that Supreme Court precedent forbids prohibitions on common arms, and because over one-hundred million of the prohibited magazines are owned throughout the country, the ban must be held to violate the Second Amendment.
Both this case and the previously mentioned Pennsylvania case could have implications that reach far beyond each state’s border. We will keep you updated on developments for both, but please visit nraila.org for more timely updates.
Missouri AG Stands Strong for Second Amendment
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey took immediate action to stop the erosion of the Second Amendment by a county commission bent on restricting the rights of law-abiding citizens who either reside within or traverse its jurisdiction. The attorney general sent a letter to the Jackson County Commission regarding Ordinance 5865, which defies both the federal and state constitutions by restricting the rights of young adults to own and possess firearms. The letter stated that the county’s recent actions in passing this ordinance “openly flouted Missouri law and are an attempt to undermine State Authority.” Attorney General Bailey referenced the state’s firearm preemption law that expressly prohibits counties from passing such ordinances.
The Jackson County Commission, in late November, passed the ordinance that, among other things, banned anyone under the age of 21 from purchasing a handgun or handgun ammunition and restricted anyone over the age of 18 but under the age of 21 from possessing a semi-automatic “assault” rifle, with limited exceptions. The commission took this action despite warnings from its attorney and county executive that the commission did not have the authority to pass such an ordinance.
The swift action taken by Attorney General Bailey shows his unwavering commitment to defending the Second Amendment and serves as a warning to any municipality that seeks to circumvent state preemption laws by passing similar ordinances in the future.
