BELLEVUE, WA – -(Ammoland.com)- The Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association have filed a lawsuit in federal district court challenging the East St. Louis Housing Authority’s ban on firearms possession by residents of government subsidized housing in that community.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of an “N. Doe” resident who wishes to protect her identity, because she is, according to the lawsuit, “hiding from a violent domestic abuser.” Plaintiffs are represented by Glen Ellyn attorney David Sigale, who has worked with both organizations in the past. They are asking for an injunction against enforcement of the no-guns rule at Auburn Terrace, a public housing facility.
“This isn’t the first time we’ve had to challenge such a regulation,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “It is simply unacceptable for citizens living in public housing to be denied their basic right to have a firearm for personal protection, and in this case, it is unconscionable.”
The complaint alleges that the plaintiff’s rights are being violated under the Second and Fourteenth amendments due to a requirement that no firearms be possessed on the Auburn Terrace property as a condition of lease.
“This situation is made even more outrageous considering what has happened to Ms. Doe while living at Auburn Terrace,” Gottlieb noted, referring to the lawsuit document.
“We’ve explained how she was beaten and raped in January 2017, and her children stopped the attack only by threatening to use a gun. On two other occasions, Ms. Doe had to call police due to shootings in nearby residences. When the housing authority threatened to terminate her lease due to the gun in her residence, they insisted that the building is safe, so she doesn’t need a gun.”
The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.
SAF & ISRA vs East St. Louis Housing Authority
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.
Right on.
It’s interesting that the left says people on government assistance can’t be drug tested saying it’s unconstitutional but they never have a problem banning them from having a constitutional right like gun ownership.
Sort of like the inability of lower rank service people living in base housing not being able to have firearms in their residences. And then there is the whole not being able to bring a firearm onto a base. The Govt’s house their rules. It stinks but is not going to change anytime soon if ever. I would be more concerned about someone falling asleep while smoking or them forgetting they have a pan of oil on the stove and burning the place down.
You’re wrong on it not changing. There has been one of these suits already won in a different jurisdiction where it was a disabled man who was continuously victimized.
Vanns40 I think that was in Maine
@Roy D, The military is not a good analogy. The military has been ruled “a society with in a society”. The S. Ct recognizes the necessity of the chain of command to the good order and discipline of the military forces.
And that is why the argument about “being old enough to serve and possibly die while in the military” will not hold water when given as a reason 18 year olds should be able to buy rifles and shotguns. Apples and oranges the court says. BS, I say.
Everyone has rights;