On September 6, 2017, Federal District Judge Garbis swept away the State's arguments and denied, in all important respects, the State's motion to dismiss. You can read the full decision here.
The Court first sustained the "standing" of MSI and the other plaintiffs to bring this suit. The Court then held that the plaintiffs had stated fully sufficient claims that the HQL statute and the implementing State Police regulations violated the Second Amendment. The Court ruled as well that the complaint sufficiently stated a claim in alleging that the prohibitions on receiving or the receipt of a handgun without an HQL were void for vagueness under the Due Process Clause. Finally, the Court also held that the complaint stated a sufficient claim that the State Police regulations were "ultra vires" as in excess of statutory authority. These rulings were an important first step in the suit. From here, the parties will move into the discovery phase of the litigation, which promises to be both expensive and very interesting. So stay tuned and please keep those contributions coming!
Mark W. Pennak, President MSI
