By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
It’s an opinion, rather than a court ruling, but gun rights activists are cautiously smiling about an Aug. 12 Justice Department memorandum now circulating which says the long-standing federal prohibition against having firearms in post office facilities open to the public does not apply to “the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons…incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.”
“Other lawful purposes” includes personal protection.
The lengthy memorandum was written by Lanora C Pettit, principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Counsel, for the Attorney General. But it is being widely circulated and discussed on social media.
However, USA Carry is advising legally-armed private citizens against rushing down to the local post office packing a firearm just to test the memo. The group cautions, “this is a legal opinion from inside the executive branch. It is not a court ruling. It tells federal prosecutors how the Justice Department reads the law. It does not bind a judge.”
After noting the memo “does not help anyone federal law already bars from having a gun.” USA Carry warns legal gun owners “the exception may not cover someone carrying without a license in a state that requires one.” “That is why your state’s carry licensing rules still decide whether any of this does you any good at the counter,” the group cautions.
Pettit’s memo notes, “You have asked whether one of those restrictions, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 930(a), is best read to impose criminal penalties on an otherwise law abiding individual who carries weapons into a post office for the purpose of self-defense. We would have significant constitutional concerns if Congress had created such a blanket ban on the lawful carrying of constitutionally protected arms into a building frequented by the public since the Founding. But we ultimately need not reach that issue here, as Congressֻ has ֻexemptedֻ the ‘lawfulֻ carrying’ ofֻ firearms ֻor ֻotherֻ dangerousֻ weaponsֻ ‘incidentֻ toֻ huntingֻ orֻ otherֻ lawfulֻ purposes.’”
USA Carry’s analysis includes these “key takeaways”:
- The Justice Department’s opinion states that carrying a firearm into a post office for self-defense is permissible under certain conditions.
- Federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. § 930, prohibits firearms in federal facilities but has exceptions for lawful carrying purposes.
- The opinion suggests that self-defense qualifies as a lawful purpose, countering previous narrow interpretations of the law.
- The Postal Service’s regulation against firearms lacks an exception for self-defense, making it potentially unenforceable for law-abiding citizens.
- This opinion is an internal legal interpretation and not a court ruling, meaning it does not bind the judiciary.
The memorandum comes only weeks after the National Rifle Association reported the Department of Justice “withdrew its appeal of a federal court decision that enjoined enforcement of the federal ban on carrying firearms at U.S. Post Office facilities.”
The law in question is 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) which states, “Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.”
But according to Subsection (d), Subsection (a) shall not apply to—
“(1) the lawful performance of official duties by an officer, agent, or employee of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision thereof, who is authorized by law to engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, investigation, or prosecution of any violation of law;
“(2) the possession of a firearm or other dangerous weapon by a Federal official or a member of the Armed Forces if such possession is authorized by law; or
“(3) the lawful carrying of firearms or other dangerous weapons in a Federal facility incident to hunting or other lawful purposes.”
