Charlottesville Lawsuit Claims 2nd Amendment Does Not Protect Militias?

by John Crump,

Armed Militias Rally
John Crump
John Crump

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- The City of Charlottesville has joined local business of Charlottesville in a lawsuit against several militias. The lawsuit contends that these groups violated Virginia law by acting as paramilitary units and private armies. It goes on to accuse the militias of providing private security for the United The Right rally. The suit's goal is to prevent these groups from returning to Charlotteville

The lawsuit also claims the militias were indistinguishable from peacekeeping forces which would make them in violation of the same law that prevents people from impersonating a police officer. Other accusations made in the suit are more outlandish than the claim that the militias would be confused with state peacekeeping forces.

The suit states “private military forces transformed an idyllic college town into a virtual combat zone.”

The lawsuit claims that the militias took part in the fighting between the Unite The Right protesters and the counter-protesters. After checking with Charlottesville police, no militia members were arrested or took part in the fight, and there were no firefights.

The lawsuit also argues that the militias are not protected under the second amendment to the US Consitution because they do not answer to the government. Their reading of the second amendment is that it gives the government the right to form a militia and not the people. It will be interesting to see how this argument stands up in court.

The suit also claims that they militias undercut the police ability to control the violence. This claim seems to contrast to the reports that the police did not try to keep the alt-right and the Antifa members separated and in fact pushed the alt-right towards Antifa when Gov. McAuliffe declared the gathering an unlawful assembly.

One of the more outlandish claims of the lawsuit is that these groups didn't register their machine guns within 24 hours of entering Virginia.

The fact is that no one in any of the militias had machine guns.

It goes on to say that these groups were also guilty of brandishing their rifles. What that would mean is that they were holding their guns in a way to cause fear that they were going to shoot their weapon. This charge was not the case in Charlottesville.

If any of the militia members were to actually brandish their weapons, they would have been arrested by the police.

Another claim that the plaintiffs make is that these groups are guilty of running a private security business without registering their business in Virginia. To run a private security business in Virginia is illegal if that firm is not registered with the state of Virginia, but none of these groups were paid to go to Charlottesville.

The lawsuit sites laws that in Virginia the militia is accountable to the state, but these laws only apply to militias formed by Virginia. By the plaintiffs own admission these groups were from New York and Pennsylvania. According to attorney Russ Haynes, on The Patriot News Podcast, the lawsuit would have to imply that these were invading militias from New York and Pennsylvania and this would be almost impossible to prove.

One fact that jumped out at me is that a source of a lot of these claims come from Antifa websites such as itgoingdown.org. This site is run by the group BAMN which acts as a parent organization for Antifa and regularly preaches violence.

Whether you agree with what the militias did that day in Charlotteville, or not this lawsuit is full of problems. If this lawsuit is successful, it could have far-reaching implications when it comes to the militia clause of the Second Amendment.

About John Crump

John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. He is the former CEO of Veritas Firearms, LLC and is the co-host of The Patriot News Podcast which can be found at www.blogtalkradio.com/patriotnews. John has written extensively on the patriot movement including 3%'ers, Oath Keepers, and Militias. In addition to the Patriot movement, John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and is currently working on a book on the history of the patriot movement and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss or at www.crumpy.com.

  • 8
    Leave a Reply

    Please Login to comment
    6 Comment threads
    2 Thread replies
    0 Followers
     
    Most reacted comment
    Hottest comment thread
    8 Comment authors
    James HigginbothamBeverly M WelchtomcatMark AreWild Bill Recent comment authors
      Subscribe  
    Notify of
    James Higginbotham
    Guest
    James Higginbotham

    lol.
    it said that MILITIA’S ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE 2ND AMENDMENT.
    i guess they also CAN’T READ.
    how about it starts off with.
    A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, BEING NECESSARY TO THE SECURITY OF A FREE STATE, THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
    only MENTAL DERANGED LIBTARDS WOULD SAY THE MILITIAS ARE PROTECTED BY OUR 2ND AMENDMENT.
    and if any one cares to check, this is just about the OPINION OF THE COMMUNIST DEMORAT PARTY WITH A FEW RINOS THROWN IN.

    Beverly M Welch
    Guest
    Beverly M Welch

    Brother Christian! Just spent well over an hour with you while you were a guest with WCP III%
    AMAZING you are Sir!
    Agree 100% with you. Please let us know if any assistance is required
    GodSpeed

    tomcat
    Guest
    tomcat

    They had a permit to demonstrate issued by the city of Charlottesville. Where is their brain, don’t have one. McAwful is telling them what to do, he is as crooked as hiLIARy because he learned from her. I sure hope the next election will be a correction of Virginia’s out of touch ways of doing things. Virginia law allows carry openly without a mother may I card. What’s the beef?

    Mark Are
    Guest
    Mark Are

    Psychopathic politicians will do what psychopathic politicians do.

    Jeffrey Stankiewicz
    Guest
    Jeffrey Stankiewicz

    So let me get this straight… If you claim the 2nd protects an individual right, the socialists scream “NO, it only protects state militias!” But now if you argue that the 2nd protects militias, they now yell “NO, it only protects government troops!” REALLY?!?!
    Does ANYONE seriously believe that our Founding Fathers were worried about protecting the right of the GOVERNMENT to form armed groups?!?! Ah-hahahaha!!!

    Wild Bill
    Guest
    Wild Bill

    @Jeff S, You are entirely correct. The notion that the Second Amendment protects members of the governments troops has been entirely repudiated. Only a propagandist would mouth that line now. The founding fathers gave the federal government no rights, but only powers and authorities. So as a matter of Constitutional interpretation, when the words say rights, those words relate to individual human persons. When the words say powers or authorities, those words refer to the federal government. But then again, the progressive/socialist/marxists don’t really care, so long as they get their way. The p/s/m s would use their pen, their… Read more »

    Christian Yingling
    Guest
    Christian Yingling

    There are more holes in this suit than a piece of Swiss cheese. And the blatant lies told by the city of Charlottesville will all be exposed in court. For you see, in the militia.. we keep records too. I commanded the militia troops in Charlottesville that day and rest assured we are prepared to battle this ridiculous suit all the way to the supreme court if need be. But I assure you, It will never make it that far. Stay tuned.

    John Crump
    Guest
    John Crump

    Hey Chris,

    Can you get in touch with me on Twitter at @crumpyss or through George