SAF Petitions Supreme Court For Review Of Rodriguez Gun Confiscation Case

Opinion

Firearms Confiscation Orders Gun Red Flag Laws
SAF Petitions Supreme Court For Review Of Rodriguez Gun Confiscation Case

USA –  -(AmmoLand.com)- Attorneys for the Second Amendment Foundation have filed a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of their case challenging the City of San Jose and its police department in a case involving the seizure of legally-owned firearms and refusal to return them.

This makes the fourth SAF case now awaiting action by the high court. No other gun rights organization has ever had this many pending cases submitted to the Supreme Court at the same time, said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb.

SAF is joined by the California Gun Rights Foundation on behalf of plaintiff Lori Rodriguez. Her firearms were seized in 2013 after her husband was taken to a hospital on a mental health issue. A San Jose police officer at the time advised Rodriguez he had the authority to seize all firearms in the residence, including those belonging solely to her, which were all locked in a California-approved safe.

The guns were seized without a warrant, and over Rodriguez’s objection.

The case has been making its way through the lower courts for seven years, even though the courts recognize that Lori Rodriguez could legally purchase new firearms. San Jose authorities simply refuse to return the guns she already legally owns. Last summer, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s decision to grant summary judgment to the defendants, ruling the defendants were allowed to seize her guns under a concept called “community caretaking.”

“This case is a travesty,” Gottlieb stated. “Lori Rodriguez is not a criminal, nor is she prohibited by law from owning firearms. Yet she’s essentially been robbed by the City of San Jose and its police department, with the cooperation of lower courts, including the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“When a municipal government agency can seize property without a warrant,” he added, “and be protected by the lower courts in so doing, it is time for the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and right this dangerously tilted ship before it capsizes.”

“Mrs. Rodriguez has at all times complied with California’s many gun control laws, including those requiring locked storage,” said plaintiff’s noted civil rights attorney Don Kilmer. “But the City of San Jose outrageously continues to refuse to return the constitutionally protected property they unlawfully took from her years ago. Governments have no reason and no right to take guns from law-abiding people who are legally eligible to keep and bear arms, full stop. The Constitution does not have a ‘gun’ exception to fundamental Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights, but that is exactly what the Ninth Circuit’s dangerous decision means. We hope the Supreme Court will vindicate our clients’ rights and restore the rule of law in the Ninth Circuit.”

Highly-respected appellate attorney Erik Jaffe in Washington, D.C., who also represents the plaintiffs, added, “In the United States, governments cannot take a law-abiding woman’s property, without a warrant, and refuse to give it back. And not only are the City of San Jose and its police department doing just that, but they also violated her fundamental Second Amendment rights in the process. Constitutional amendments are not mere suggestions. This case offers a vehicle for the Supreme Court to remind lower courts and government agencies that constitutional principles are not different or diminished in cases involving firearms.”

The three other SAF-related cases already submitted for Supreme Court review are Pena v. Cid, Mance v. Barr, and Culp v. Madigan. The Mance case involves SAF’s sister organization, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as a plaintiff.

“SAF has been winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time,” Gottlieb observed, “but now we hope to do it four lawsuits at a time.”

Help SAF Win More Cases And Protect Your Rights!

14 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Lava
Lava (@lava)
1 year ago

You should spell out what SAF is in every article. Only one organization doesn’t need to be spelled out.

Circle8
Circle8 (@circle8)
1 year ago

Everyone should note that the democrat primary election held in Khalifornia on 3 March 2020 resulted in the democrats voted and chose a COMMUNIST. Therein lies the problem.

Tionico
Tionico (@tionico)
1 year ago

So the dirty copper made the claim “we have the authority to seize ALL firearms at the residence”.

Fine.. under WHAT specific authority? Is it spelt out in the warrant that lt them seize the gentleman to cart him off to the looney bin? Is there some arcane section of San Jose Municipal Code? Or California’s massive set of codes and laws?

Make that copper PROVE his authority. He cna’t, dollars to stale donut holes.

Country Boy
Country Boy (@country-boy)
1 year ago
Reply to  Tionico

The guns were seized without a warrant, and over Rodriguez’s objection.

StWayne
StWayne
1 year ago

Cops who hide behind the color of the law for political reasons are not “sworn officials,” but jack-booted nazis. They will continue to make targets of themselves when they behave this way because they bring it on themselves. Respect is not given, it is earned.

MICHAEL J
MICHAEL J (@retaile23)
1 year ago

City governments and lower courts that disregard laws are nothing more than communist run secret societies. Their blatant methods are proof that they can and will operate above the law.
They will become so brazen that even the Supreme Court orders will be ignored. Speaking of which, why aren’t these violators personally held accountable for their illegal acts? Instead they get off, only to do it again.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill (@wild-bill)
1 year ago

San Jose does not deserve to have a police department because their police dept. officials are either ignorant of the Bill of Rights or decided to ignore the Bill of Rights in favor of this unconstitutional state legislative act. The police officers decided to just follow orders rather than honor the Constitutional Rights of citizens. Therefore the damages, in the civil suit to come, should be twenty years SJPD budget.
Police just can not allow themselves to be the private army of the city councils.

Shortround
Shortround (@shortound)
1 year ago

Make you a bet the firearms are no longer in their keeping. Guns ten to leave police lock up..

ShooterOne
ShooterOne (@clydestoker)
1 year ago
Reply to  Shortround

If the firearms are not in their keeping, they better be forced to replace with her exact duplicate (brand, caliber, and model).

ARM UP, CARRY ON!!!

Finnky
Finnky (@finnks)
1 year ago
Reply to  Shortround

@Short – My thought as well. They are incapable of returning the firearms because they have been dispersed to any number of officer’s homes and/or sold to criminal gangs. Get ATF back into California to arrest all officers involved. If we have to put up with ATF interference with legitimate personal business – no reason they cannot be expected to deal with illegal firearms dealers.

JFCrosby
JFCrosby (@captjfcrosby)
1 year ago

What is “full stop?”

Tionico
Tionico (@tionico)
1 year ago
Reply to  JFCrosby

it is “Brit Speak” for “period”, as in the dot that signfies th end of a sentence. Used this side the Puddle it tends to carry a stronger sense of “and that is an end to the matter”.

Deplorable Bill
Deplorable Bill (@deplorable-bill)
1 year ago

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The cops are wrong for taking her guns. All the asinine comiefornia legal codes had been met. A blatant case of tyranny.
Anyone who wants to disarm the free American public is evil. I hope this lady sues the heck out of them. Maybe a couple of badges and several million dollars might wake up the powers to be that THEY WORK FOR US, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

Arm up, carry on.

gregs
gregs (@gregsodeman)
1 year ago

not only is evil, it is immoral for them to do so. they have taken away her defense of herself and family when they confiscated her weapons. is her husband still in the mental health facility? has he been treated and released? if he has been released then probably he is no longer a danger to himself or others. qualified immunity should be stripped from all law enforcement officers in America. if they violate anyone’s civil rights, they should be held legally accountable and pay a severe penalty because of the position of authority they hold. personally I have lost… Read more »