Pennsylvania Federal Judge Enforces Second Amendment

Pennsylvania Appeals Court Finds Life in 10th Amendment to Declare PLCAA Void, iStock-884188404
Pennsylvania Federal Judge Enforces Second Amendment, iStock-884188404

U.S.A.-(AmmoLand.com)- In a significant win for supporters of Second Amendment rights, the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania granted a preliminary injunction order to William Drummond and the Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. on October 13, 2021.

Drummond had sought to open a sportsman’s club at an existing range that had operated as the Greater Pittsburgh Gun Club since the middle 1960s. It consists of 265 acres in Robinson Township, Washington County, Pennsylvania.

In December of 2017, Drummond entered into a lease to operate the club. On February 19, 2018, the Robinson Township Board of Supervisors commenced proceedings to deny Drummond the ability to operate the range, through a change in the zoning ordinance.

The Board denied Drummond’s application for a zoning permit to operate the club. The lawsuit was brought by Drummond, with the aid of the Second Amendment Foundation, claiming the zoning ordinance violated Drummond’s Second Amendment Rights.

The District Court dismissed the lawsuit in January of 2019. The case was appealed to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. The Third Circuit vacated the District Court’s dismissal and sent the case back, based on the violation of the Second Amendment by the zoning ordinance.

One of the findings of the court seems of particular significance. From the order:

Although the health, safety, and welfare are substantial government interests, the Township must provide some evidence of how the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance serve those substantial government interests. The government must “persuade us that ‘the recited harms are real, not merely conjectural, and that the regulation will in fact alleviate these harms in a direct and material way.’”

Although the case took most of four years to resolve, this is a very significant win. Those who want to restrict Second Amendment rights must show real evidence of harm, not just a generic “health, safety, and welfare” claim. They must also show how their law or regulation will actually alleviate the harm. That is very difficult to do for Second Amendment rights.

Judge Marilyn J. Horan, the United States District Judge, did as she was required to do. She issued the injunction. From the Preliminary Injunction Order:

Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, Plaintiffs’ Preliminary Injunction is hereby GRANTED as follows:

Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of the injunction are enjoined from enforcing Robinson Township Zoning Ordinance Sections 311(D), 601, and 208, Table 208(A).

The township may try to continue the case, but it seems unlikely. Another case, in a Pennsylvania state Commonwealth Court reached a similar conclusion in a separate case brought in Monroe County in May of 2021. Both courts cite the Second Amendment and a Seventh Circuit decision in their cases. People have to be able to shoot and practice as part of their Second Amendment rights. They have to have access to places to shoot.

Federal courts in the Third Circuit and the Pennsylvania state courts are now in agreement. You cannot use zoning ordinances to shut down gun ranges simply because you do not like them. That violates the Second Amendment and is not allowed under the rule of law.


About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Dean Weingarten

Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mike
Mike
12 days ago

This kind of decision warms me to the core.

CourageousLion
CourageousLion
1 month ago

How about it simply violates your PROPERTY rights period! If the guy bought an existing range then there should have been no issues at all.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
1 month ago
Reply to  CourageousLion

True, but the appellate judge just forced the entire political population to stop ignoring the Second Amendment. The appellate judge just pumped the Second Amendment full of power, again!

Bubba
Bubba
1 month ago

We’ll Take The Win!

Just keep those types of Judges ruling on the 2nd….

Keep the leftist propaganda machine out of the Bill of Rights and our Constitution.

Start hanging Traitors to the Constitution. (Like Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer, Bloomberg, Stallone, Streisand, Robbins, Sarandon just to name a few of the thousands)
You will see how fast the rest change their tune.

DaveW
DaveW
1 month ago
Reply to  Bubba

I do believe traitors should be punished. I would rather see that punishment come down to making them pay financially for denying 2A (or any other rights) to the degree that they must face the rest of their lives without finances to enjoy their remaining years at the level they previously enjoyed.

Hanging them would be to easy on them.

TStheDeplorable
TStheDeplorable
1 month ago

Gun-grabbers talk out of both sides of their mouths. As the courts move toward a more express affirmation of the 2nd Amendment as a personal right to be armed at home and in public, the left looks for restrictions on “time, place and manner” that would survive judicial scrutiny. On one hand they say “you need to have a license and you need to show competency every year in order to carry a firearm.” Such a requirement would likely survive judicial scrutiny (I’m not saying it should be allowed, but that it would be allowed). Then they say, “gun ranges… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by TStheDeplorable
BigJim
BigJim
1 month ago

Health, saftey and welfare? You mean like burning down buildings, looting stores and getting a vaccine that has not undergone the minimum 18 month study prior to releasing it to the public.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
1 month ago
Reply to  BigJim

Yep, the states claim to have an interest in the peoples’ health, safety, and welfare, but if you call the police for help, then they claim that you have no right to get the police response and help that you urgently need!
They can not have it both ways. Either one argument or the other is false.

willyd
willyd
1 month ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

At least this judge did it right, more cases should be argued only on denial of second amendment rights! Also this thought of medical problems to rule all guns is a problem to society, is not all hog wash but the information is slanted like all news media pushing these facts, anything to take our rights away from us!!!!!!!

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
1 month ago
Reply to  willyd

Well stated and good points!