SAF Sues New York City over Handgun Fees!

krucam · Apr 5, 2011

And of course our buddy Mayor Bloomberg...
http://www.saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=351

SAF FILES FEDERAL LAWSUIT AGAINST BLOOMBERG OVER GUN PERMIT FEES
For Immediate Release: 4/5/2011
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg that alleges New York City’s $340 fee for a permit to keep a handgun in the home is “excessive and…impermissibly burdens the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.”

SAF is joined in the lawsuit by the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and five individual New York City residents. Also named as a defendant in the lawsuit is New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman.

“Under state law,” said SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, “the maximum fee for issuing a New York State handgun license is $10, but the law exempts citizens living in New York City. That exemption allows the city to charge an exorbitant fee for the license, which discourages city residents from exercising their civil rights while violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment......

Rest is at: http://www.saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=351

These folks never rest....
:party29:

EDIT: The Complaint is HERE

MDFF2008 · Apr 5, 2011

I was waiting for this. He's def taking on the King of Gun Control.

Kharn · Apr 5, 2011

Very nice

swinokur · Apr 5, 2011

Maybe Patrick or Mark can explain how this suit fits into Gura's overall strategy.

Not a coincidence I'd imagine

jmira · Apr 5, 2011

I may have to move back home! oh wait nevermind...

Inigoes · Apr 5, 2011

swinokur said:
Maybe Patrick or Mark can explain how this suit fits into Gura's overall strategy.

Not a coincidence I'd imagine

Logically, it was a next stone to cast. Since self defense is a core right under 2A. Whatever .gov entity can regulate the manner to an extent (making sure you're not a prohibited person, etc).

Now if .gov is forced to issue permits, but sets the bar so high financially, then that would violate the Equal Protection clause. The rich can afford the license, leaving the poor to be defenseless.

mikec · Apr 5, 2011

swinokur said:
Maybe Patrick or Mark can explain how this suit fits into Gura's overall strategy.

Not a coincidence I'd imagine

I am neither but I think this would be the first step in taking apart NYC's legislative protection that NY State has given the City.

In NY state one must have a permit to own or posses a handgun. A permit issued in Monroe County, Rochester area, is valid everywhere in NY except for NYC. A permit issued elsewhere in the state is also invalid in NYC.

Next would be a challenge to argue why aren't permit standards consistent across the state.

press1280 · Apr 5, 2011

The fee is by far the most draconian in the country, you can buy some guns for less than the 340$ fees. This was an easy target since it probably beats the next closest fee by 100 or 200 dollars. NY's Gonna have a hard time explaining their fee structure, maybe they'll say it's to cover their budget shortfall.

Al Norris · Apr 5, 2011

The attorney is David D. Jensen, PLLC, New York and New Jersey. This is the attorney handling the Muller v. Maenza (NJ) case. He has separated from his former law offices (Duane Morris LLP) and has a (limited) website here.

MDFF2008 · Apr 6, 2011

I would say that Gura is using this to address the fee's issue. This case will deal with fees and it will be addressing the right "In the home" which is an area Gura is basically King of the Hill.

It hopefully well set a precedent that excessive fees are not going to be tolerated and close the door on excessive CCW fees if/when Gura gets 2A outside the home established.

Dogabutila · Apr 6, 2011

I'm thinking its just to take on Bloomberg. It's a decent case, but not a hugely important one. By that I mean it does impact the future, but not in a really big way. Most places don't have large fee's to own a handgun, but it does set the precedent that you can't make it too hard to get a gun.

I think the symbolism of actually sticking it to Bloomberg, who we all know is one of the biggest anti-gun knuckleheads out there, is a lot more meaningful in an ironic way. Slapping down one of the biggest activists on the other side is always a victory for your own.

Walter · Apr 6, 2011

I'm trying to understand.. why did SAF not file a lawsuit that seeks to completely abolish the "Residence Premises" permit? The permit being challenged here - NY's "Residence Premises" permit - is to simply keep arms (specifically handguns) within your own home. While I know that at this time it may be somewhat of a stretch to do away with permits to bear arms (CCW permits), is it really that much of a stretch to do away with a permit just to keep them?

Or is this part of a bigger picture? For example, even though NY's permit at issue here only addresses the "keep" part of the 2nd Amendment, could precedent set in this case also apply to "bear" permits - to keep the anti-gun states (MD/NJ/CA, etc) from extorting us with excessive fees for CCW permits once shall issue gets rammed down their throat by the SCOTUS?

Patrick · Apr 6, 2011

After reading the complaint, a few thoughts:

This was coming. I am pleased to see it happening now.
This is not a Gura case (David Jensen, as Al notes). Jensen appears to be another good litigator the SAF has added to their cadre. One of Gura's stated goals was to find, grow and cultivate strategic litigators for the movement.
This is not about Bloomberg, though I bet it was a nice addition.
The SAF claims that the fee paid to NYC is not used to defray costs. NYC is bound to argue otherwise, but there is little way they can justify the whole fee as administrative.
The lead plaintiff (Kwong) is a union electrician. Maybe we'll see a change in plaintiffs once the union leans on him. We saw in Chicago the SAF have to find a new spot for heir mobile gun range after the city leaned on the owner of the first property the SAF was going to rent. There are four other defendants to take his spot.

This is an important case. If the SAF is correct on the administrative fee claims, then NYC will need to justify their fees some other way. Those fees absolutely must be subject to strict scrutiny - there is no way around it. None. That means the city will have to demonstrate a compelling need for the fees. I think we all welcome their only real defense at this point: the fee is designed to be prohibitory because of the unique harm caused by handguns in New York City. In other words, "we created this fee on a fundamental civil right because we want to diminish the exercise of the right."

A win here would remove another barrier to lawful ownership of firearms for self defense. Municipalities would have their hands tied, and more importantly - the right to keep and bear arms would have a strong protection from rules that are meant to discourage its exercise.

Expect a lot of discovery on this one. There is a fact-finding phase here when it comes to the permit fee and how it is used. I bet there is a lot of information in the record about the creation of the fee and why it was there - specifically to diminsh gun ownership in the city.

Note that Jensen is not challenging the existence of a permit or fee - only the outrageous nature of it. As written, it appears that fees that cover administrative expenses are not being challenged. Seeing as how NY State has set those fees, NYC is is overcharging for anything above that amount ($330, in this case).

Will ownership permits themselves ever be challenged? Yes. But not today.

pcfixer · Apr 6, 2011

mikec said:
I am neither but I think this would be the first step in taking apart NYC's legislative protection that NY State has given the City.

In NY state one must have a permit to own or posses a handgun. A permit issued in Monroe County, Rochester area, is valid everywhere in NY except for NYC. A permit issued elsewhere in the state is also invalid in NYC.

Next would be a challenge to argue why aren't permit standards consistent across the state.

Yes. Sounds like equal protection under the 14th.

pcfixer · Apr 6, 2011

press1280 said:
The fee is by far the most draconian in the country, you can buy some guns for less than the 340$ fees. This was an easy target since it probably beats the next closest fee by 100 or 200 dollars. NY's Gonna have a hard time explaining their fee structure, maybe they'll say it's to cover their budget shortfall.

New York City
application fee is $340.00. The fingerprint fee is $94.25.

Patrick · Apr 6, 2011

mikec said:
I am neither but I think this would be the first step in taking apart NYC's legislative protection that NY State has given the City.

In NY state one must have a permit to own or posses a handgun. A permit issued in Monroe County, Rochester area, is valid everywhere in NY except for NYC. A permit issued elsewhere in the state is also invalid in NYC.

Next would be a challenge to argue why aren't permit standards consistent across the state.

I have family in upstate with carry permits. They give wide berth not only to NYC, but anything near it.

I hadn't thought about this in particular, but you have a good point. This could damage the whole regime if it can be demonstrated that NYC's laws were enacted specifically to discourage gun ownership/possession. That was legally OK many years ago. Not so much today.

My initial feeling is Bloomberg is going to fight like hell. Then again, if he wants to run for president some day he is going to have to make some hard choices now. He is no dummy - unlike Daley he is more politically pragmatic. I wonder if the will eventually figure out he is on the losing side and that things are not likely to turn again soon - or ever (if these cases work the way we want).

How long does a politician with eyes on a bigger office (Senate, White House) choose to fight for the losing team when the opponents are the people who he needs to vote for him? He will not win a Senate seat without some upstate support, and the liberals in Syracuse are not enough on their own. Also, I can say for certain that there are a lot of guns in those same areas.

Jim Sr · Apr 6, 2011

Patrick said:
I have family in upstate with carry permits. They give wide berth not only to NYC, but anything near it.

I hadn't thought about this in particular, but you have a good point. This could damage the whole regime if it can be demonstrated that NYC's laws were enacted specifically to discourage gun ownership/possession. That was legally OK many years ago. Not so much today.

My initial feeling is Bloomberg is going to fight like hell. Then again, if he wants to run for president some day he is going to have to make some hard choices now. He is no dummy - unlike Daley he is more politically pragmatic. I wonder if the will eventually figure out he is on the losing side and that things are not likely to turn again soon - or ever (if these cases work the way we want).

How long does a politician with eyes on a bigger office (Senate, White House) choose to fight for the losing team when the opponents are the people who he needs to vote for him? He will not win a Senate seat without some upstate support, and the liberals in Syracuse are not enough on their own. Also, I can say for certain that there are a lot of guns in those same areas.

http://readme.readmedia.com/NYSRPA-files-lawsuit-against-NYC-over-pistol-license-fees/2258075

http://eon.businesswire.com/news/eon/20110405007368/en/Bloomberg/gun-control/gun-rights

http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/breaking-bellevue-v-bloomberg-as-saf-sues-over-excessive-nyc-gun-permit-fee

press1280 · Apr 6, 2011

pcfixer said:
New York City
application fee is $340.00. The fingerprint fee is $94.25.

According to the SAF, the fees don't go toward administration at all;it all goes to police pensions. I'd like to see them(NYC) say that it's OK because if they don't have those fees then they won't have enough to pay for cops and then voila.......blood in the streets.

Patrick · Apr 6, 2011

That would be an interesting twist, even if it would fail. The cannot fund municipal obligations by taxing a fundamental right.

There is jurisprudence out there on the difference between "fees" and "taxes", but I am not sure if it matters when it comes to fundamental rights. If NYC cannot create a nexus between the fee and the cost to provide the permit, it is a tax on a right. Post-hoc rationalizations are not going to cut it, either. They cannot suddenly push the money into a new permit-funding system and stay legal.

Patrick · Apr 6, 2011

Said the mayor last October, "We want to be in compliance with the law…so that we don’t want to lose the ability to have reasonable controls. If we have controls that the courts have ruled too onerous or too unfair, we could lose the whole thing.”

Yes, you could.

Interesting article from the Gothamist on the mayors proposal last year (which the council ignored). A city council member likened the fees on guns to the fees for water and sewer. They just don't get it.

Bloomberg understood the risk and tried to head off the suit. He knows what can come of this: "we could lose the whole thing."

SAF Sues New York City over Handgun Fees!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

VA Rocks.

Head'n for the hills

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Spud Head

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

MSI Executive Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

R.I.P.

Ultimate Member

MSI Executive Member

MSI Executive Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics