By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
When the Department of Justice announced its lawsuit against the City of San Jose, California and its police department over what it calls “exorbitant fees” for concealed carry permits, did it signal to other jurisdictions to back off trying to price the public out of exercising their Second Amendment rights?
The answer may not come immediately, but Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon noted in a DOJ statement announcing the legal action, “All law-abiding Americans have a constitutional right to bear arms for self‑defense. This right is not a luxury reserved for a privileged few, but a fundamental element of our republic.”
“You don’t need a law degree to recognize that charging a fee several times higher than the cost of the firearm itself is illogical, and an unconstitutional attempt to impede Americans’ Second Amendment rights,” she added.
The Santa Cruz Sentinel reported the city’s concealed carry license fee comes to $1,591, calling it the highest in the country. Elsewhere around the state, the newspaper said, fees vary to include a $216 fee in Los Angeles County for a two-year permit, while San Francisco charges $288. And in Alameda County, the charge is $694 and the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s office fee is a whopping $976.
It is a significant contrast to what gun rights organizations have accomplished in New Jersey, where about two dozen local municipalities have refunded their share of the state-mandated $200 fee for a carry permit. The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action and the New Jersey Firearm Owners Syndicate started the project last year.
However, Dhillon recently put the State of Minnesota on notice about its delays to “permit-to-purchase” process, threatening legal action. In a post at “X,” Dhillon stated, “A right delayed is a right denied. Minnesota cannot deny Americans the right to purchase commonly owned firearms with weeks-long waiting periods. The @CivilRights Division’s Second Amendment Section will challenge these violations of fundamental rights!”
She gave the state until tomorrow, Sept. 23, to respond.
