How the DOJ should target all of California’s unconstitutional anti-gun laws
It’s time to end the California-compliant madness.
by Lee Williams
Late last month, Attorney General Pamela Bondi announced that the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division filed a lawsuit against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, “due to their pattern or practice of infringing the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens seeking concealed carry weapons (CCW) permits.”
The lawsuit came about after a six-month federal investigation found “unreasonable delays” in how the LASD issues its CCW permits. LASD officials turned over documents that revealed only two CCW permits had been approved from more than 8,000 applications, and that Sheriff’s officials sometimes waited more than two years to interview applicants and start the process.
“The Second Amendment protects the fundamental constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to bear arms,” Bondi said in a press release. “Los Angeles County may not like that right, but the Constitution does not allow them to infringe upon it. This Department of Justice will continue to fight for the Second Amendment.”
To be clear, this federal lawsuit is long overdue, and it may actually be as Bondi’s team called it, the “first affirmative lawsuit in support of gun owners filed by the U.S. Department of Justice.” There are thousands of Los Angelinos who may finally get their CCW permits, and other California top cops will look at what transpired and speed up their own permitting process to avoid similar federal lawsuits.
But is it enough?
Is CCW permitting, or the lack thereof, the place to start enforcing the Second Amendment in the country’s most heavily populated anti-gun state?
California’s bevy of unconstitutional state laws strip the Second Amendment rights from its 39 million citizens. Take a quick look at the state’s Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale.
“As of January 1, 2001, no handgun may be manufactured within California, imported into California for sale, lent, given, kept for sale, or offered/exposed for sale unless that handgun model has passed firing, safety, and drop tests and is certified for sale in California by the Department of Justice,” California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta warns.
How does this horrific state law not violate the Second Amendment?
Look at how California defines an “Assault Weapon.” The current state law bans AKs, Uzis, CETMEs, HK-91s, 93s and 94s, dozens more and of course the country’s most popular rifle. All normal AR variants are banned, as is any handgun that can accept more than 10 rounds.
How does this horrific state law not violate the Second Amendment?
California very clearly and very openly violates the civil rights of its nearly 40 million residents in a host of other ways. Magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds are illegal, as is ammunition of various styles, calibers and capabilities. So called “undetectable” firearms are banned, as is anything with a “short” barrel.
California’s anti-gun heresy is well known to U.S. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Kaur Dhillon, who took over running the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division earlier this year. Dhillon is the former vice chair of the California Republican Party. She knows the state very well.
“The Second Amendment is not a second-class right,” Dhillon said in the press release. “This lawsuit seeks to stop Los Angeles County’s egregious pattern and practice of delaying law-abiding citizens from exercising their right to bear arms.”
Now, armed with a federal badge in her billfold, Dhillon could do a lot of good for her home state, especially if she keeps using the Special Litigation Section, a small but powerful group of federal prosecutors and investigators who are part of the Civil Rights Division.
The Special Litigation Section launched the DOJ’s investigation of the LASD in March because its federal charter allows it to investigate the “rights of people who interact with state or local police or sheriffs’ departments.”
Once it finishes an investigation, the Special Litigation Section usually presents the sheriff or agency head with two documents: A consent decree and a federal lawsuit with the official named as the defendant. The top cop gets to pick only one.
If the senior law enforcement official chooses the consent decree, the Special Litigation Section provides a bevy of experts to help retrain the agency’s officers or deputies to get them to stop their civil rights abuse. It works hard with the agency, sometimes for years. In this case, Los Angeles County Sheriff Robert G. Luna must have rejected the consent decree and was then served with the lawsuit, which are always made public.
A quick example is the Ville Platte, Louisiana, Police Department (VPPD) and the Evangeline Parish Sheriff’s Office (EPSO). A lengthy 2016 investigation conducted by the Special Litigation Section found that “both EPSO and VPPD engage in a pattern or practice of violating the Fourth Amendment by arresting and detaining individuals without probable cause. Moreover, we have serious concerns that these agencies use holds to obtain coerced statements that taint the criminal convictions of the unlawfully detained individuals.”
It took both agencies time to make the required changes, but last February—nine years later—the Justice Department announced a successful conclusion in a settlement agreement.
Those who value their Second Amendment rights should hope that the Special Litigation Section will now target other California law enforcement organizations, which like the LASD, are violating the Second Amendment rights of their residents by enforcing California’s unconstitutional state laws. If they investigate more than just late CCW permits, they could change state law and restore the civil right of millions of Californians.
It’s time to end this California-compliant madness. The Special Litigation Section would be a great choice to lead the way because they have never once lost a case.
The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn’t be possible without you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support pro-gun stories like this.
Incredibly thorough and well-researched article. Every time I come here, I leave far better informed.
Establishing a special legislation to counter and correct the injustices perpetrated on California’s population will be the only way for them to regain their freedoms established under our constitution. The real problem with California is their corrupt election fraud. But I guess that’s pretty much the same with the rest of the criminals running all of the blue states. If the populous of all of the blue states don’t take a stand their children and their children’s children will be forever damned. Sad..