From the Firearms Policy Coalition . . .
Less than a week after it secured a historic victory in a post-trial judgment striking down California’s unconstitutional ban on so-called “assault weapons,” Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) has filed a new federal Second Amendment lawsuit challenging Nevada’s unconstitutional statutes enacted in Assembly Bill 286, which established a new, confiscatory ban on all unserialized, self-manufactured firearms as well as all “unfinished frames or receivers.”
The complaint in Palmer v. Sisolak can be found at FPCLegal.org.
Three days ago, Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak signed AB 286 into law, which “radically expands the State of Nevada’s statutes to unconstitutionally and categorically ban, under pain of severe criminal sanctions, the possession, receipt, manufacturing, and sales” of Non-Firearm Objects (“NFOs”) the State classifies as “unfinished frames or receivers,” and further bans both the possession of previously self-manufactured firearms as well as, prospectively, any further self-manufacturing of firearms.
FPC’s complaint alleges that Nevada’s ban is categorically unconstitutional, explaining that “the government cannot narrow the channels for exercising the right to keep and bear arms by limiting one’s access to the essential instruments of that right to limited, government-approved manufacturers of firearms and firearm predecessor materials.”
The complaint also says that “Nevada’s Ban imposes a blanket prohibition against a broad class of protected arms in common use for self-defense and other lawful purposes by ordinary law-abiding citizens like the Plaintiffs.”
“Nevada’s broad ban on the possession and construction of constitutionally protected firearms and precursor materials violates Nevadans’ Second Amendment rights and unlawfully deprives them of their property, in violation of the Constitution,” said Adam Kraut, FPC’s Senior Director of Legal Operations.
“In order for a law-abiding individual to exercise their Second Amendment rights, they must have the ability to possess firearms, including those they build themselves. As our complaint explains, the right to self-build one’s own arms has been enjoyed, and at times absolutely necessary, since the founding of our country. We will aggressively litigate this action and seek an injunction to prevent this law from depriving individuals of their rights and property.”
Individuals that are interested in joining FPC in the fight against tyranny can become a member of the FPC Grassroots Army for just $25 at JoinFPC.org.
Firearms Policy Coalition and its FPC Law team are the nation’s next-generation advocates leading the Second Amendment litigation and research space. Some FPC legal actions include:
-
A challenge to California’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” (Miller v. Bonta) that resulted in a post-trial judgment and permanent injunction against the challenged regulations, the first such victory in United States history
-
A brief supporting certiorari in NYSRPA v. Bruen, which was granted by the U.S. Supreme Court
-
A challenge to Minnesota’s ban on handgun carry by adults under 21 (Worth v. Harrington)
-
A challenge to Illinois’ ban on handgun carry by adults under 21 (Meyer v. Raoul)
-
A challenge to Georgia’s ban on handgun carry by adults under 21 (Baughcum v. Jackson)
-
A challenge to Tennessee’s ban on handgun carry by adults under 21 (Basset v. Slatery)
-
A challenge to Maryland’s ban on handgun carry (Call v. Jones)
-
A challenge to New Jersey’s ban on handgun carry (Bennett v. Davis)
-
A challenge to New York City’s ban on handgun carry (Greco v. New York City)
-
A challenge to Pennsylvania’s ban on handgun carry by adults under 21 (Lara v. Evanchick)
-
A challenge to the federal ban on the sale of handguns and handgun ammunition to adults under 21 years of age (Reese v. ATF)
-
A challenge to Maryland’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” (Bianchi v. Frosh)
-
A challenge to California’s handgun “roster”, microstamping, and self-manufacturing ban laws (Renna v. Bonta)
-
A challenge to Pennsylvania’s laws completely denying the right to carry to individuals who were previously granted relief from prior non-violent convictions and are not currently prohibited from possessing firearms (Suarez v. Evanchick)
For more on these cases and other legal action initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube.