FPC Secure Injunction Against PA State Police Partially Manufactured Receivers

80 Percent AR15 Lower Receivers
80 Percent AR15 Lower Receivers

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- Today, Judge P. Kevin Brobson of Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court issued a 17-page opinion and order enjoining Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) Commissioner Colonel Robert Evanchick and his agents, servants, and officers “from implementing or enforcing PSP’s new policy addressed to partially manufactured receivers…” PSP issued and enforced the now-blocked policy after being directed to by Attorney General Josh Shapiro in an opinion issued last month. The Court’s opinion and order are available at FPCLegal.org.

Just 4 days after Shapiro’s ‘legal opinion’ was published, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) Law filed a lawsuit and sought an emergency injunction on behalf of its members and co-petitioners Landmark Firearms LLC, US Rifle LLC, and Polymer80, Inc. The petitioners were represented by attorney Joshua Prince, Chief Counsel of Civil Rights Defense Firm, P.C., at the January 21 preliminary injunction hearing.

The “indefiniteness of PSP’s new enforcement policy on what constitutes a firearm in this Commonwealth creates the potential for arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement,” Judge Brobson explained in today’s opinon. “The public policy of this Commonwealth does not favor such vague laws.” And while there “are many ills that our society faces, and government can be an effective force in combatting them,” the “laudable intentions and policy goals of a government agency, however, cannot override limits on governmental power. Simply put, the ends cannot justify the means.”

“Under the PSP’s policy, good, law-abiding people and businesses were threatened with numerous criminal and civil penalties for things that not even the State Police could define. Today, the Commonwealth Court found that the PSP’s policy violated the constitutional rights of our clients and others,” commented Prince about the ruling. “We are gratified by the Commonwealth Court’s appropriate and sound decision enjoining the Pennsylvania State Police from enforcing its new policy regarding what it refers to as ‘partially manufactured frames and receivers.’”

“Today’s order protects people from a dangerously vague interpretation of the law. As the Court pointed out, a law is void on its face if it is so vague that a person of common intelligence must guess as to its meaning,” explained FPC Director of Legal Strategy and co-counsel, Adam Kraut. “Attorney General Josh Shapiro and the PSP attempted to shoehorn a radical expansion of the law into the definition to suit a political agenda. But nowhere in the Uniform Firearms Act nor its regulations are the terms ‘frame’ or ‘receiver’ defined. We are delighted with this positive development and look forward to further litigating on behalf of the People, civil rights, and individual liberty.”

Individuals and others who wish to support the case can join FPC at JoinFPC.org or make a tax-deductible donation to Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) at bit.ly/fpf-donate. Further information is available at JoshShapiroIsATyrant.com.


About Firearms Policy CoalitionFirearms Policy Coalition

Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, advance individual liberty, and restore freedom.

Firearms Policy Foundation (www.firearmsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPF’s mission is to defend the Constitution of the United States and the People’s rights, privileges, and immunities deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition, especially the inalienable, fundamental, and individual right to keep and bear arms, through research, education, legal action, and other charitable programs.

9 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bill
Bill
1 year ago

Well be ready for their ( the state) counterattack. Just as we are always coming up with runaround to ATF definitions etc, they will take the courts ruling, study it, look at why the ruling went the way it did, fix it, change words and attack again. Either that or they’ll just say screw the Court and do something anyway. That’s about where the DS is at now anyway. They are really showing themselves more and more, and with the segment of the brainwashed public who believe them, their megaphones and money backers they’re giving us a war that can… Read more »

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
1 year ago

YEAH! I’ve been thinking about buying a hundred of these partially finished paper weights just to have them. LOL! Now days with the right program and a CNC machine someone can just stick a block of billet in a machine and press “POWER ON” and have a fully complete receiver in a few minutes.

AJChwick
AJChwick
1 year ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

Even simpler, for the very common person, a Dremel, and about 2-hrs. No CNC required.

Tionico
Tionico
1 year ago
Reply to  AJChwick

true enough. Bu tthe CNC does make high volumes easier to produce. I defninitely like the idea of dozens, perhaps even thousands, of garages and basements having the efficient tools to crank out such items at high volume, together with the backup stock of the raw materials. There may well be a time, within our remaining days on this big old dirtball, where such a capablity would prove invaluable. I hope not… but better ready watching idle machinery than not ready and off to the camps in the cattle cars.

USMC0351Grunt
USMC0351Grunt
1 year ago
Reply to  CourageousLion
Arny
Arny
1 year ago

So refreshing to see we still have a few common sense judges in PA that actually support the Constitution. And thank you FPC for your fight. Even though we shouldn’t even be having this happen in the USA. If you don’t believe in all our Constitutional amendments why run for office ? Maybe try running to another country It will benefit all of us greatly.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
1 year ago
Reply to  Arny

No, maybe them MOVING to another country would benefit all of us greatly! Oh, wait, maybe “running” is your way of saying moving? I read it as running in another country at first.

Tionico
Tionico
1 year ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

I read “running to” as in escaping by the hair on their chinny chin chins the “desparate” and “intolerable’ situation in which they find themselves here… they view this nation, with even our current gun laws, as a house on fire sure to end us all, and are running pell mell to some other place where guns are so tighly restricted no law abiding person can own them or use them. cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, are all such places, and they would be welcomed into their numbers with open arms…… and you and I would welcome their departure with great celebration.… Read more »

Arny
Arny
1 year ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

Sorry I should have used the word MOVING.