Three weeks after New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham introduced a blatantly unconstitutional gun ban for Albuquerque and the surrounding areas, all the cases challenging public order are back in front of Judge David H. Urias.
Three weeks ago, Judge Urias issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the public health order, enjoining the state from enforcing the order. The Governor vowed to fight on but would later amend her order to ban guns in parks, playgrounds, and areas where children play. The Governor uses the “sensitive areas” clause to try to get around the courts.
The judge’s first question is whether there was a standing issue since the order was now limited to public parks, playgrounds, and places where children play. All the plaintiffs argued that they still have standing since their original complaint dealt with parks. The National Association of Gun Rights (NAGR) and We the People (WTP) both filed supplemental briefs since the TRO, which satisfied the standing issues.
The judge then asked if the case was moot since the original order was modified. The plaintiffs argued that the case was not moot because the order could still come back due to the Governor’s interviews in the media. Gov. Grisham told several media outlets she planned to fight to return the order. Judge Urias didn’t think that the Governor would reinstate the order. The lawyers for the defense stated that Gov. Grisham has no plans to bring back the complete order. The plaintiffs also still had issues with the remaining provision in the public health order.
The judge asked the defense if there was any plan to extend the public health order since it is due to expire on Friday. The attorney for the defense, Holly Agajanian, said the Governor is planning on extending it for another 30 days and will reevaluate every 30 days after that, but the order is not expected to go anywhere soon. She says that the decision will be “data-driven.”
The plaintiffs pointed out that there is a shooting range in the city that is in a public park. By the letter of the law, the public health order means that the shooting range must be shut down. There was some back and forth on whether the range would be shut down or not. The plaintiffs argued that it didn’t matter and that only the letter of the law matters. The plaintiffs referenced Ezell v. Chicago, where Rhonda Ezell sued the City of Chicago for banning shooting ranges. She was successful
The judge agreed with the plaintiffs that the “where children play” clause in the order was overly vague. He asked the defense what they would consider an area where children play. Ms. Agajanian gave examples of public pools and community centers. She pointed out that places such as dumps were not included, even though she played there as a kid.
Ms. Agajanian was very emotional as she talked about shootings and violence in New Mexico. She asked the judge what he would think if he saw a person with an AR-15 standing in a park. She asked him to think of the kids. The judge said Bruen bound him and could not use interest balancing. The defense argued that the judge should use interest balancing for the kids. She argued that children are psychologically scared by active shooter drills and pointed to the fentanyl epidemic.
Ms. Agajanian says there are gun owners who carry guns to intimidate people and dare others to do something. The Defense attorney also took a shot at the gun lobby for suing the Governor. The judge didn’t seem persuaded.
“There is a significant population of agitators and instigators; I guess I would call them,” Agajanian argued. “And they are people that intentionally bring their weapons into the public sphere with the purpose of intimidating, of daring somebody to do something about it because they can.”
Gun Owners of America (GOA), Firearms Policy Coalition, and WTF all decided to join the NAGR case going forward. Each team of attorneys will still argue their case and submit briefs, but combining the cases will smooth things out and remove any issues with standing.
The judge denied the original preliminary injunction because he said it was moot since the public health order was modified but extended the TRO on the remaining restrictions until October 9. He will consider issuing a preliminary injunction on the current order by then. He gave the lawyers until Friday to file supplemental briefs.
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
from https://ift.tt/2WgTyIe
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment