SAF Victory In Pennsylvania Gun Range Ban Case

Professional Outdoor Media Association Media Range Time with New Guns
SAF Victory In Pennsylvania Gun Range Ban Case

U.S.A.-(AmmoLand.com)- A federal court has granted a preliminary injunction in a case involving zoning restrictions designed to ban a gun range in Robinson Township, Pennsylvania, the Second Amendment Foundation announced.

The case is known as Drummond LLC v. Robinson Township. Plaintiffs in the case are William Drummond, GPGC LLC and SAF. The lawsuit dates back to 2018, when plaintiffs sued the township and Zoning Officer Mark Dorsey, alleging violation of the Second and Fourteenth amendments.

“We’re happy with the judge’s ruling because this should signal an end to Mr. Drummond’s problems with Robinson Township,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Government simply cannot use zoning restrictions to put a business they don’t like out of business.

“The judge was forced to issue the ruling after twice having the case remanded back to her by the federal appeals court, where SAF and the other plaintiffs received favorable rulings that the case should proceed,” Gottlieb noted.

Under the judge’s order, “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).”

In her ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn J. Horan noted, “Although the courts owe ‘substantial deference’ to local zoning decisions, restrictions on rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment…must still satisfy intermediate scrutiny…At this stage and for purposes of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, the Township has not provided evidence that the challenged Ordinance provisions…in fact serve the asserted government interests of health, safety, and welfare.”

“Gun ranges are a necessary component in the exercise of Second Amendment rights,” Gottlieb observed. “Even Judge Horan recognized this in her ruling, where she quoted the Supreme Court’s decision in Heller that ‘The right to bear arms ‘implies something more than mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them; . . . it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms.’ In essence, the township was trying to zone out the Second Amendment.

“This court victory is important because it shows your Second Amendment rights don’t stop at your front door,” Gottlieb said. “It’s essential to our mission of winning firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.”


About the Second Amendment Foundation

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 700,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

Second Amendment Foundation

Subscribe
Notify of
5 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Laddyboy
Laddyboy
8 days ago

This IS A LIE: “rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment…must still satisfy intermediate scrutiny“!
The Constitution is EXPLICITLY CLEAR, IN PLAIN ENGLISH LANGUAGE that STATES that NO INFRINGEMENTS upon the American People EXIST!!!!!

Arny
Arny
8 days ago

So what does the range owner get for his troubles ? I’m sure it cost him a good penny & a considerable amount of time. The ones denying him should have to pay personally.

Finnky
Finnky
8 days ago

Court said they should apply “intermediate scrutiny”. Sure zoning fails under those rules – but as something striking at the core of constitutionality protected civil rights aren’t they supposed to apply “strict scrutiny?” Or “heightened scrutiny” or whatever they call the toughest hurdle. Sounds as though this is an anti-court, being forced by appellate court to rule for the range while inserting poison pill of still using inappropriate level of scrutiny.

DDS
DDS
8 days ago
Reply to  Finnky

Strict Scrutiny, even after Heller and McDonald, is still reserved by lower courts for the “real” civil rights in the other 90% of the Bill of Rights. The “red headed step child” Second Amendment will have to put up with the table scraps until SCOTUS is forced into a box and finally takes steps to make The Bill of Rights whole again.

swmft
swmft
8 days ago
Reply to  DDS

and I hope to live that long