If you’ve always thought that the ban on carrying firearms in post offices was bogus, you’ll be gratified to know that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas agrees with you.
On September 30, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in a case challenging the ban on possessing and carrying firearms in post offices. In granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, the court granted both declaratory and injunctive relief, declaring the ban unconstitutional and enjoining its enforcement against the plaintiffs.
“The Court determines that both 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) and 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(1) are inconsistent with the principles that underpin this Nation’s regulatory tradition,” the ruling in the case Firearms Policy Coalition Inc. v. Bondi stated. “Thus, they are unconstitutional as applied to carrying firearms inside an ordinary post office or on post office property.”
The ruling, written by Chief District Judge Reed O’Connor, gave a reasonable explanation of the court’s decision.
“It is hard to envision that the Founders would countenance banning firearms in the post office—particularly because they did not do so themselves,” the ruling continued. “Thus, the Government has not carried its burden” to justify its ban on carry in and around post offices.
The Court thus held that the prohibition is “unconstitutional as-applied to carrying firearms” inside a post office or on post office property. The court’s order also blocks the federal government from enforcing its unconstitutional ban against SAF and FPC members.
Brandon Combs, FPC president, said the ruling will put an end to lawful citizens being harassed and threatened for carrying a firearm on post office properties.
“As we’ve said all along, governments cannot ban weapons in unsecured public spaces, full stop,” Combs said in a press release announcing the ruling. “For too long, peaceable people have been threatened with prosecution simply for carrying weapons for self-defense while mailing a package or buying stamps. That ends here. The Second Amendment simply does not permit governments to invent new so-called ‘gun-free zones’ wherever they please.”
As for SAF, a partner in the lawsuit, Executive Director Adam Kraut called the ruling “encouraging.”
“Millions of people across the country visit the U.S. Post Office as part of their daily routine,” Kraut said in a news release. “As we’ve stated throughout this case, there is no historical tradition of banning firearms at post offices, and peaceable Americans all over the country should not be forced to choose between using basic postal services and the exercise of their fundamental rights. Today’s ruling is an encouraging step towards restoring these rights.”
Alan M. Gottlieb, SAF founder and executive vice president, was also quite pleased with the ruling.
“This is a huge win for SAF and its members,” Gottlieb said. “There is no historical analogue to justify a ban on carrying a firearm on postal property, and we are pleased the court rightly saw through this thinly veiled attempt at preventing citizens from fully exercising their constitutional rights.”
Read the full article here
