Massachusetts Cross Border Carry Case Receives New Support

AmmoLand ^ | August 20, 2024 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

As of August 19, 2024, five amicus briefs in favor of the defendant have been filed in the seminal interstate carry case of Commonwealth v Donnel. Arguments will be heard before the Massachusetts Supreme Court on September 9, 2024.

On June 19, 2024, this correspondent noted only one amicus (friend of the court) brief had been filed in favor of the defendant, Dean F. Donnell, Jr. Donnell, a New Hampshire resident, was arrested in Massachusetts for carrying a firearm without a Massachusetts license. The district court’s opinion found the law requiring a license for law-abiding people from other states who could legally carry in their own state to be facially (obvious on its face) unconstitutional. Four other amicus briefs have been submitted by August 19.

One of those briefs was submitted by several organizations acting together to defend the Constitutional rights to arms and self-defense. Those organizations were the California Rifle and Pistol Association, Second Amendment Law Center, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners of California, Gun Owners Association, Operation Blazing Sword – Pink Pistols, Second Amendment Defense and Education Coalition,  and Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois.

The brief was submitted by Jason A. Guida. It is a well-written and well-argued brief. The brief is 39 pages long. Here is the summary of the argument. From the brief:

This case is simple. There is no historical tradition supporting a requirement that peaceable nonresidents already permitted to carry in their home states submit to a burdensome process to obtain a Massachusetts license to carry (“CCW”) if they wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights while visiting or passing through Massachusetts.₂ On the contrary, laws historically exempted travelers from such local restrictions.

[marktwain]

There is no historical, legal tradition supporting the concept of a citizen from one state, who can legally carry a firearm for self defense there, can be forbidden to carry in a different state. The historical tradition is the opposite, with exceptions made for people who are traveling.

[ClearCase_guy]

I’m no lawyer but I keep thinking about the same—sex marriage issue. Seemed like as soon as one state (MA) legalized same-sex marriage then it became a nighmare for the other 49 — what if a “married” couple from MA moved to another state?? That new state would have to recognize the marriage, right?? And Voila! We get SCOTUS recognizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states.

Well, if you have a license to carry in one state, why isn’t it good in all 50?

[kickstart]

MA will just ignore any court rulings that are in favor of 2nd Amendment issues.

[uranium penguin]

Even easier..
Why is my Ma driver’s license recognized and accepted outside of mass. And why does Ma accept out of state licences as valid?

But further.. When did a license to carry a firearm (generally) come into law?

After the Civil War with the expressed rationale to prevent Blacks from being armed?

[edwinland]

I wish all articles were like this one. Clear, directly to the point (i.e. doesn’t start with “When Napoleon crossed into Russia one fateful day in 1812” ... “and that ten paragraph story reminds me of the topic of this article”) and it includes links to the source material.

[T.B. Yoits]

Any state whose firearms permits are not accepted in Massachusetts needs to refuse to accept any documentation from Massachusetts - driver’s license, marriage license, business license, even passenger manifests on aircraft.

[riverrunner]

Because the libs want disarm everybody.

They are very willing to push communist’s ideas onto others.

But very willing to destroy conservative ideas.

[TheDon]

Agreed. Such writers are tiresome. I typically skip such articles or simply skip to the last paragraph or so on occasion.

[Lurker]

Why hasn’t someone sued using the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution? All 50 States are required to accept driver’s licenses and marriage licenses from other States. Why are CCLs any different?

L

[curious7]

And since well over 20 states have constitutional carry - why do the commie states think they can violate the rights of residents from those states that are visiting or passing through? They ought to get hit with rico or massive class action suits. Continuously.

[Stanwood_Dave]

Your over the target (homosexuals from Oklahoma, went to North Carolina {I think}) to get married, when Oklahoma didn't want to honor the "full faith and credit part," of the U.S. Constitution.

Your correct in your thoughts playing out. "Well, if you have a license to carry in one state, why isn’t it good in all 50?" & U.S. Territories (Guam, Puerto Rico, etc.)

Per history and TEXT, 1792, a license / permit was/may have been; needed to carry CONCEALED, not for open carry. Everybody and their mother's were openly carrying.