Gura’s motion was impressive, citing case law from various courts throughout the country and he made many compelling points.  First and foremost, he noted that the DC’s Council did not abide by the Judge’s order to fashion a permit system that complied with the Second Amendment.  Gura pointed out that the narrow permit procedure still constituted a complete ban for almost all individuals and that only those with a “special need” would receive a permit.  Further, he stated a constitutional right such as the right to bear arms cannot be enjoyed if it is only accessible to those with such a “special need”.

The “special need” Gura was referring to was the language in the temporary legislation that provides that only those who prove there is a legitimate threat to their person or property” or those with “proper reason” can survive the permit process and be allowed to carry in DC.  Gura noted that these strict requirements made no sense since the “core component of self defense” was the ability to defend oneself wherever that person happened to be at that time

The motion further stated the plaintiffs were not unhappy that a permit procedure existed. In fact, their motion noted that a system requiring background checks and safety checks was reasonable.  But, the plaintiffs asserted that the permit process effectively banned the carrying of firearms completely. Which is exactly the type of ban the court had previously found unconstitutional.

Additionally, Gura argued the appeals process was laughable.  The legislation provides a five person board which would review permit denials, but Gura implied those board members would merely be puppets of DC political leaders seem to oppose firearms completely.  Gura maintained that a board made up of former DC law enforcement and former prosecutors from the DC establishment would not be inclined, ever, to rule in favor of a gun owner.

            What’s next?

• Attorneys for DC will have the chance to respond to this motion and argue the counterpoints and, of course, argue against a permanent injunction of the handgun ban. 
• DC Police Chief Lanier is still working on fashioning the regulations and procedures to accommodate the temporary legislation.
• The DC Council Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety will hold a public oversight hearing on the new carry laws on October 16, 2014.  This meeting will address the components of the permanent carry legislation.
• On October 17, the parties will appear again in court.  The city will argue for the judge to reinstate the ban and the plaintiffs will argue the DC Council’s temporary legislation defied the court’s orders to create a permit procedure that is constitutional.  It is unclear how the judge will rule.  It is unlikely he will allow the city to reinstate the ban but it is also uncertain how much he will be involved in shaping or opposing DC’s restrictive permit process.  While some courts have struck down similar legislation. Other courts in Colorado and Maryland have allowed similar bills to stand.

Gun owners, resident and nonresident alike, should expect much time to pass until there is clarity in DC carry laws.  As always, this is the time to make yourself heard by demanding respect for civil rights.