Gun Group Seeks SCOTUS Review Of Mance Interstate Handgun Sales Case

Supreme Court Continues to Reschedule Concealed Carry Case
Gun Group Seeks SCOTUS Review Of Mance Interstate Handgun Sales Case

BELLEVUE, WA – -(AmmoLand.com)- The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States for review of its case challenging the long-standing ban on interstate handgun sales to law-abiding citizens from other states.

The case, known as Mance v. Whitaker, comes out of the Fifth Circuit and involves a Texas firearms retailer and two would-be customers who reside in Washington, D.C. A federal district court earlier ruled that the interstate handgun transfer ban is facially unconstitutional, which was reversed by a Fifth Circuit panel. The Fifth Circuit denied the petition for rehearing en banc by a fractured vote of 8-7. Plaintiffs in the case include CCRKBA, Andrew and Tracy Hanson of Washington, D.C. and Texas firearms retailer Fredric Mance. They are represented by attorney Alan Gura.

“The ban on interstate handgun sales was adopted decades ago,” noted CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “prior to the advent of the National Instant Check System that is now in place. The Hansons have essentially been denied the ability to legally purchase a handgun from a licensed retailer because of this prohibition.

“But our case goes to the heart of what appears to be a reluctance in the lower courts to enforce the Second Amendment even now, more than ten years after the landmark Heller ruling and eight years after the McDonald ruling,” he continued. “This continuing problem is mentioned in our petition to the high court.

“After all,” Gottlieb observed, “if a citizen is law-abiding in his home state, he or she is going to be law-abiding in a different state where they might find a firearm they want to buy, but the interstate sales ban prevents that. Citizens can purchase all sorts of other goods across state lines, but why not the one tool that is specifically mentioned and protected by the Constitution’s Second Amendment? That simply defies logic and common sense.”

Funding support for this lawsuit is provided by the Second Amendment Foundation, which is CCRKBA’s sister organization and specializes in education and litigation.

“This case has been in the system for quite some time,” Gottlieb noted. “We’re hopeful that the Supreme Court, with its new makeup, will grant our request for review.”

Petition for SCOTUS Review of Mance v. Whitaker


Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear ArmsWith more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (www.ccrkba.org) is one of the nation's premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.

  • 19 thoughts on “Gun Group Seeks SCOTUS Review Of Mance Interstate Handgun Sales Case

    1. I am a born American Citizen, with a long family history of heritage, gun owners, honorable military services and non violent civilian lives and services. I too am a combat Vietnam Veteran, serving 28 years of regular and reserve service in the Coast Guard and one in the 348th Mp unit Army Reserves, so thirty (30) years of Honorable Service! I can vote and at 69 years old, I have lived and worked in several different States. In those states, I could buy firearms in and from other states, but not in California! I am free to travel from state to state and carry my weapons. One can also declare their firearms and travel on domestic flights! Freedom to be free, to pursue what I am guaranteed under the Constitution, Speech, Working, Voting, Religion, paying taxes, but pursuit of happiness and Right to Bear Arms are infringed by Gun Control! I am entitled to Equal Rights Under the Constitution! Unalienable Rights, under the Constitution! Yet, other Citizens have rights, I am being denied! If people decide to choose to not possess or purchase a firearm, that is their Right! But, their choices should not and shall not infringe or or in anyway, deny me or other Law Abiding Citizen(s) or restrict, their Rights! I have been trained and sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, from enemies foreign and domestic. To deny an American Citizen of a God given and Right Of The US Constitution, is in every instance, Against the Law. Our most basic law, in these United States! If you control the purchase of a gun, ammunition or other aspects to being able to lawfully bear arms, it is Gun Control to limited access and use of what the Constitution, intends for us, in this Country to be able to defend ourselves and This Nation! Without obstructions and infringements!

    2. Author: Eric Lautz
      Comment:
      “WE JUST NEED RBG to fall a couple more times! I dont see how it is apropriate she is still in office, the woman clearly does not have all her faculties. If she is going to selfishly hold up the postion from a younger person who has a better grip on reality ”

      Then she should hold on to Hillary. Down they go!

    3. The guns in question could have been bought by merely sending the guns to an FFL holder in their home state…it done all the time!

      1. But that’s not the point.

        Why should I have to subject myself to unconstitutional state and federal laws that hinder my 2nd Amendment RIGHT? Rights trump laws in America, in theory.

      2. Why should some one have to pay an additional transfer charge to a local dealer, which most of them charge at least $25.00. It’s redundant BS, Bureaucratic nonsense, meant to discourage the ordinary citizen from purchasing a firearm. In a lot of cases the local dealers are in favor of this, for obvious reasons, they make $25.00 for handling the transaction.

      3. You have never dealt with the transfer of a firearm into DC have you. There is ONE FFL in the city, and no, that doesn’t mean there is an opportunity there. There is only one because of the restrictions the city has put on the ability to be an FFL in the city. His office is located INSIDE of Metro PD HQ. He has to charge a large fee to provide transfer services because of the fees imposed on him by the city. He is not allowed to actually display firearms for sale (he is pretty much just a transfer FFL). I deal with him all the time and surprised he stays in this business. There is always something new he needs to deal with to keep the city happy.

      4. True enough, but HOW does that work?

        I have pught a number of handguns, and sold a few, interstate, always going through an FFL as (unconsitutuoinally) demanded by current law.

        As a non-FFL I can NOT ship a handgun throughUSPS, though last I checked I may ship long guns that way.

        That leaves UPS and FedEx. They ONLY ship handguns priority overnight. last I did this $80. Add THAT to the purchase price of the handgun and decuct it from MY net on sale)

        I MAY bring it to an FFL locally, who will run it through HIS books, and ship it via USPS Flat Rate Box for about fifteen. BUT, since it goes through HIS books, he takes risk, and time, and he charges ME another $25.

        THEN the buyer must go to his FFL who will then run it through HIS books, do the BGC, any extra state paperwork, and CHARGE.. most have a minimum of another fifty bux. Some charge in excess of a hundred. Depends on state, locale, etc.
        SO… when I am standing there at the gun counter or show in Texas, and duscover that old Smith revolver I’ve been wanting since I was a kid, the price is right, good condition. WHY can I not just put the plonk down on the counter, endure the BGC, which sends the same information I’d provide back home, to the same FedGov agency (that should not even exist) and provides the Proceed code so the sale can be completed. Most FFL’s consider the time/hassle of running the 4473 and BGC as part of their Cost of Goods Sold, so I pay nothing extra. Besides, I now have possession of my long desired handgun, I can go and shoot it right away, having recourse to the FFL if there IS a problem (otherwise I pay round trip shipping, as described above, plus more BGC’s to re-take it when its done).

        The reason the interstate handgun sales ban was enacted (besides nasty gun control dweebs controlling in one more way) was ostensibly because a felon in one state COULD, knowing he could not buy one in his home jurisdiction, simply hop a Grey Dawg, travel two or thre states away, buy what he wanted, and trot the Dawg back home. No interstate records to prevent the sale in the state he visited.
        BUT< aspointed out in the article, with NICS in place, it is natioinwide. Same info, same check system, no matter who, when, or where. If I cna't pass the BGC in my home state, neither will I in Texas or Maine. Thus the basis in thought and law for the old interstate sales ban is mooted. That ban should go away, should have decades ago.

        Handguns are the ONLY items I can think of that cannot be purchased in some state other than my residence, the only other exception being some cars… a few states illegally prohibit any car made after a specific year being regustered in the state of residence of the putative purchaser unless it comlies with CALIFORNIA EPA specs. This is another blatant violation of the INterstate Commerce Clause… if I can own something in state A I can also own it in state C or G. If I owned it in state G and move to state A, that state now says I cannot register it in my new state. Clear violationi of ICC< yet no one has challenged this one. Good reason to NOT move to State A…….

      5. True enough, but HOW does that work?

        I have pught a number of handguns, and sold a few, interstate, always going through an FFL as (unconsitutuoinally) demanded by current law.

        As a non-FFL I can NOT ship a handgun throughUSPS, though last I checked I may ship long guns that way.

        That leaves UPS and FedEx. They ONLY ship handguns priority overnight. last I did this $80. Add THAT to the purchase price of the handgun and decuct it from MY net on sale)

        I MAY bring it to an FFL locally, who will run it through HIS books, and ship it via USPS Flat Rate Box for about fifteen. BUT, since it goes through HIS books, he takes risk, and time, and he charges ME another $25.

        THEN the buyer must go to his FFL who will then run it through HIS books, do the BGC, any extra state paperwork, and CHARGE.. most have a minimum of another fifty bux. Some charge in excess of a hundred. Depends on state, locale, etc.
        SO… when I am standing there at the gun counter or show in Texas, and duscover that old Smith revolver I’ve been wanting since I was a kid, the price is right, good condition. WHY can I not just put the plonk down on the counter, endure the BGC, which sends the same information I’d provide back home, to the same FedGov agency (that should not even exist) and provides the Proceed code so the sale can be completed. Most FFL’s consider the time/hassle of running the 4473 and BGC as part of their Cost of Goods Sold, so I pay nothing extra. Besides, I now have possession of my long desired handgun, I can go and shoot it right away, having recourse to the FFL if there IS a problem (otherwise I pay round trip shipping, as described above, plus more BGC’s to re-take it when its done).

        The reason the interstate handgun sales ban was enacted (besides nasty gun control dweebs controlling in one more way) was ostensibly because a felon in one state COULD, knowing he could not buy one in his home jurisdiction, simply hop a Grey Dawg, travel two or thre states away, buy what he wanted, and trot the Dawg back home. No interstate records to prevent the sale in the state he visited.
        BUT< aspointed out in the article, with NICS in place, it is natioinwide. Same info, same check system, no matter who, when, or where. If I cna't pass the BGC in my home state, neither will I in Texas or Maine. Thus the basis in thought and law for the old interstate sales ban is mooted. That ban should go away, should have decades ago.

      6. Handguns are the ONLY items I can think of that cannot be purchased in some state other than my residence, the only other exception being some cars… a few states illegally prohibit any car made after a specific year being regustered in the state of residence of the putative purchaser unless it comlies with CALIFORNIA EPA specs. This is another blatant violation of the INterstate Commerce Clause… if I can own something in state A I can also own it in state C or G. If I owned it in state G and move to state A, that state now says I cannot register it in my new state. Clear violationi of ICC< yet no one has challenged this one. Good reason to NOT move to State A…….

    4. WE JUST NEED RBG to fall a couple more times! I dont see how it is apropriate she is still in office, the woman clearly does not have all her faculties. If she is going to selfishly hold up the postion from a younger person who has a better grip on reality and the voice of the country, then I say, I can wish for a fall or two! Her and Fienstein! Shoot dont get me started on Fienstein the woman had a chinese spy working as a office manager for 20 years and she didnt even know! How clueless can you be? Where is her special councel investigation? (These comments are in NO way to be construded as a threat, I am just praying for nature to take its course like anyone would for a suffering love one at there end of life cycle!)

    5. What did anyone expect? The Who, illegal GCAof 1968 is directly base on the NAZI weapons control act! You can thank former Democratic sen 5homas Dodd for that! Ma6 he rot in Hel” foe al” eternity!

    6. Can someone help me understand why my wife’s cousin (long beach) can not purchase a firearm in any other state? I didn’t believe it when he visited.
      We went to a store so he could grab some “high capacity” magazines, and he mentioned this to me. I said “no way! ” “let’s see” So, I asked my friendly sales guy behind the counter, he says, “where’s your cousin live?” California, I say. “Is that on his state issued ID?” Yep, I says. “Nope” he says. “I cant sell to him.”
      What? Blew me away. I guess I had no real clue how nuts their laws were until it hit close to home.

    7. I do not think the numbers are there yet, at least one more replacement on the court is needed,as the chief justice I see as the swing vote and who knows what Kavanaugh will pan out to be.

      1. Kavanaugh….good point. Around the time of his nomination, I read some ‘iffy’ things about which way he may flop’
        I guess we’ll find out.

        1. Keep dreaming, Wild Bill. Never going to happen, especially after the Kavanaugh battle. The smart money is on a conservative female judge to replace Ginsburg.

    Leave a Comment 19 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *