PA Bill Number: HB2663

Title: Providing for older adults protective services; and making a repeal.

Description: Providing for older adults protective services; and making a repeal. ...

Last Action: Referred to AGING AND OLDER ADULT SERVICES

Last Action Date: Nov 19, 2024

more >>

More events

SAF mulls next move after court setback on I-594 lawsuit :: 05/08/2015

Second Amendment Foundation Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb is mulling his next move after a federal district court judge today dismissed without prejudice the lawsuit against provisions of Initiative 594, the 18-page gun control measure passed by voters in November following a multi-million dollar campaign push by the gun prohibition lobby.

The Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility, which pushed the initiative with a $10 million-plus campaign fund, is already chortling over the judge’s order. In an e-mail funding request that went out almost immediately after the order was announced, WAGR’s Geoff Potter stated, “The judge dismissed it ‘without prejudice’, which means that they can bring the lawsuit back at a later date. And you better believe that they will. We’re seeing no signs that the gun lobby is backing off or accepting defeat.”

But Gottlieb, in a press release issued this afternoon, may have thrown anti-gunners a curve ball in their fund-raising exploit. He also said that SAF will "continue to pursue justice in this case."

“If the state is willing to sign a consent decree that they will not prosecute any citizen under I-594 who is not prohibited from owning firearms,” he offered, “we will consider not filing an appeal.”

In his order, Judge Benjamin Settle acknowledged that “The Court is sympathetic to Plaintiffs in that one must actually be prosecuted or under actual or immediate threat of prosecution before the Court may address the constitutionality of a statute.” The judge further observed that “the fairness of this rule may definitely be questioned…”

“It is mind boggling that a law-abiding citizen evidently must put their civil rights, not to mention their clean criminal record, at risk before a court can rule whether a law is constitutional,” Gottlieb observed. “It is definitely unfair, and we believe every American will think it unfair that someone has to be chained and incarcerated before they are allowed to challenge an attack on their constitutional rights.

“Because the state has refused to prosecute violators does not diminish the constitutional threat of this law,” he said. “This is 2015, not the Dark Ages.”

-------------------------------

Got an opinion about this column? Weigh in below in the "Comments" section.