Judge Rejects Lawsuit

No, not our lawsuit, but the one brought by the National Shooting Sports Federation.
As most of you know, there have been several different lawsuits based on CT’s recent passage of unconstitutional gun laws, including the one CCDL is a part of. Each lawsuit addresses a different part of the problem. The NSSF’s lawsuit attacked the improper way the law was passed using the “Emergency Certification” process.

Yesterday Chief U.S. District Judge Janet C. Hall ruled that the NSSF lacked the standing to challenge the law. Now, to be perfectly clear, that doesn’t mean the judge sided with the state or ruled that the process was legal, she just ruled that the NSSF was not directly impacted by the process, so they couldn’t sue. You can read more about legal standing here, and you can read the full court ruling at the link below.
NSSF-Decision-Granting-Motion-to-Dismiss.pdf.

No word yet on if the NSSF plans to appeal the ruling, but we’d like to thank them for all the effort so far, as well as their support of our own lawsuit.

9 thoughts on “Judge Rejects Lawsuit

  1. Isn’t there one member here that has filed numerous FOIA claims pertaining to this law? Perhaps he could be added to the suite as a complainant, to provide the legal standing as someone that has lost something.

    • Yup …. FOIC has still not heard any case yet … I’m sure the NSSF could find a million persons …. why they did not include any natural person in their suit is a mystery; I saw standing issues .. and the court did too. They can support a re-filing with natural persons … I hope they do.

  2. Umm..just to be clear, how can a Constitutional challenge be rejected on whether or not someone was impacted by it? OK, if that’s how it’s going to work, than the NSSF can put us up as the complaintant and back us up.With the same argument. It just seems really really weak to judge that they cannot sue based on impact. Since a lot of people they represent are impacted by it. Not only that, but the NSSF hosted events here are very impacted by it.

    • The same way I can’t sue you just because I don’t like what you did to someone else.
      *I* can’t sue you for putting your fence on your neighbor’s side of the property line.

  3. I hope that’s not our judge. Every citizen of CT has standing. Did they not sue on behalf of someone? That is why we named people. I hope the fix is not in ala simple majority judicial nominations payback. In CT, no judge that through out the liberal wet dream law would ever get reappointed.

  4. Pingback: Speaking Of Lawsuits | CCDL Blog

Comments are closed.