By Dave Workman
Editor-in-Chief
The Second Amendment Foundation has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court in the long-running case of Defense Distributed v. Attorney General of New Jersey, which is essentially a First Amendment case dealing with the publishing of computer files which can be used to produce 3D-printed firearms.
This federal lawsuit was originally filed against New Jersey back in 2018. New Jersey passed a law prohibiting the publication of such information eight years ago, and SAF quickly filed the lawsuit. The complaint alleged then New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal “censored the plaintiffs’ free speech rights by threatening to jail them or anyone else” who violated the statute, according to a SAF news release at the time.
“This isn’t about firearms, it’s about freedom of speech,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb explained at the time. “If Attorney General Grewal can suppress the sharing of technical information about the production of firearms components using modern technology, what else might he, or another attorney general choose to suppress at some future date if he or she doesn’t like it?”
Now, nearly eight years later, the case is poised to go before the high court to determine whether New Jersey, or any other state, can criminalize the distribution of digital instructions that might be used to produce a 3D firearm, now dubbed “ghost guns” by the gun prohibition lobby and their allies in the media.
In a statement announcing the petition, SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut observed, “The files at issue in this case are speech, and their publication is as protected as a book about gunsmithing. As is typical in states like New Jersey, all basic principles of law and civil rights get thrown out the window when it’s related to guns. New Jersey hates the Second Amendment so much that it’s willing to infringe on other rights as collateral damage. Speech about making guns is no different from any other protected speech, and computer files that provide that instruction are no less protected than a textbook full of diagrams and measurements.”
Gottlieb, still at the SAF helm, stated, “This case has carried on way longer than it should have. We’ve been seeking a resolution in this lawsuit for almost a decade now, and it’s high time for a final decision, hence the request to the Supreme Court. The merits of the case are simple – computer files are most certainly covered under the First Amendment, and we think this is a great vehicle for the Court to affirm those protections.”
SAF and Defense Distributed had also filed a federal lawsuit against then-Secretary of State John Kerry, the State Department and other federal officials challenging the federal government’s censorship of 3D printing information during the Obama administration. Kerry served as secretary of State under Obama until 2017.
Meanwhile, in other court action, SAF announced a settlement resolving remaining claims against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department in a case known as California Rifle and Pistol Association v. LASD.
According to a SAF announcement, the settlement follows LASD’s representation that it is now processing concealed carry weapon (CCW) permit applications within the 120-day period required by California law. This settlement is not connected to the Justice Department’s civil action against the Sheriff’s Department.
SAF is joined in this case by the California Rifle and Pistol Association, Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, Gun Owners of California and several private citizens.
Key elements in the settlement include
- A preliminary injunction forcing California to begin issuing CCW permits to qualified nonresidents – the first ruling in the country confirming that the right to carry does not stop at state lines. That relief was later made permanent when the Legislature enacted AB 1078, which essentially codified the terms of the injunction.
- A preliminary injunction against LASD’s extreme multi-year wait times, which, combined with pressure from a parallel U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit that was filed after our case, led the department to bring its processing times into compliance with state law.
- Changes to California law eliminating automatic five-year bans on CCW eligibility based solely on temporary restraining orders that were dissolved without a full hearing.
- Reforms by the City of La Verne, which subsidized its psychological exam requirement and modestly reduced related fees after being sued over the high total cost of obtaining a permit; the fight on the high fees issue now continues in our lawsuit against Santa Clara.
