This Ping List is for all news pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from this Ping List.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 07/25/2024 10:48:09 AM PDT by Red Badger
Florida Carry’s recent legal victory will benefit every law-abiding Floridian seeking to purchase a firearm.
The Florida Carry, Inc., is proud to announce a major court victory against the administrative state in Florida. This victory will benefit every law-abiding Floridian who wants to purchase a gun. The case, Pretzer v. FDLE, was decided last week by the First District Court of Appeals.
Florida Carry General Counsel Eric J. Friday of Kingry & Friday, PLLC, in Jacksonville, with substantial assistance from U.S. Law Shield, brought the lawsuit against the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) and director Rick Swearingen, who Mark Glass later succeeded.
“The case was filed to challenge their creation of a decision-pending response,” Friday said. “People had been waiting months to have a decision rendered by FDLE on a firearm purchase.”
When the case was originally filed, five plaintiffs had waited from one to eight months. Once FDLE was served, Friday said, the plaintiffs were all cleared within 48 hours of being named in the suit. “They had the ability to clear them,” Friday said. “They just weren’t doing it.”
The court told FDLE they now have four options only:
1. approve
2. non-approve
3. conditional approval
4. conditional non-approval
The en banc panel strongly objected to FDLE’s requirement that potential plaintiffs waste time exhausting the department’s administrative process rather than filing suit in court.
“In the opinion that follows, we discuss the applicable law, the trial court’s interpretation of section 790.33, the provision of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) explicitly addressing exhaustion of administrative remedies, and the applicability of the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies with regard to an action pursuant to section 790.33. Finding that the relief authorized by section 790.33(3)(f)1. is the remedy in this case, rather than any remedy available under the APA, we reverse the judgment of the trial court,” the appeals court said in their decision.
“This ruling ends to ability of administrative agencies to deny firearm rights without being subject to lawsuits and attorney’s fees for their misconduct,” Friday said. “It also ends their ability to force people into the lengthy administrative process when the Legislature has not required this administrative process. This is an argument every agency has attempted to use against gun owners, and the Court has removed that argument from administrative agencies that want to violate Floridians’ gun rights.
“Ending government abuse of citizens is always a huge victory,” Friday said.
But, Friday predicts Florida Department of Law Enforcement won’t change, at least not until they’re forced to change. “They won’t change until they’re found by a court to have violated Florida’s gun-purchasing background check law,” he said. “790.33 was intended to stop this type of abuse before a lawsuit is needed, but clearly it has not worked. The penalties need to be stiffer.”
The First DCA decision is expected to resurrect several additional lawsuits.
Respectfully,
Your Florida Carry board of directors.
Ping!.............
A good win in Florida. Incrementally, we are winning. Bit by bit...
Whatch gonna due, sue me? Well, actually, yes.
Son moved to Virginia and it took him 6 months to be permitted and that’s with TS clearance. Said he wasn’t going to waste his time on getting licensed in DC.
This Ping List is for all news pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from this Ping List.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Interesting… I was under the impression that Florida was a good Gun Rights state.
When did this start?
Biden Vows to Push Supreme Court Reform in Final Months in Office
“Over the next six months, I’ll be focused on doing my job as president,” he said, highlighting key goals such as boosting economic growth, lowering inflation, ** tightening gun control, and safeguarding the planet from what he described as a “climate crisis.”**
While President Biden has resisted pressure from the progressive wing of the Democratic Party to adopt measures such as imposing term limits on Supreme Court justices or packing the high court with additional justices, he did create a commission to examine possible Supreme Court reforms, including ending lifetime appointments. Ultimately, the 34-member commission did not endorse adding seats to the high court and took a neutral stance on term limits.
Darry Allen Sragow, a Democratic political consultant, told Reuters he was surprised that President Biden mentioned Supreme Court reform in his Oval Office speech.
“In a sense, that came out of nowhere, he didn’t have to put that in the speech, but the fact that he mentioned that suggested to me that in his mind, for the future of the country, this has become a high priority and what he is presumably referring to is the recent decisions coming out of a Supreme Court that is dominated by very conservative justices,” Mr. Sragow said.
It’s a good thing he can’t do this through an EO and this won’t make it through the legislative branch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.