Lawsuits are Important, but Nowhere Near a Sure Thing
Listen to audio on Youtube
For several years now, there has been a growing portion of Second Amendment community that wants nothing to do with grassroots advocacy. As we have won a handful of rare Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) rulings, beginning with Heller in 2008, too many 2A proponents have become hyper reliant on litigation. This reliance has only grown faster after the Bruen decision on June 23, 2022.
When the Bruen decision was announced there was premature celebration throughout the 2A community that the fight was finally over. Those of us who understood the history of such rulings knew all too well, the real fight had just begun.
In 1955, SCOTUS issued a ruling in Brown v. Board of Education in 1955. The case against segregation in schools was a huge win for communities of color. However, historians will tell you that things actually got worse in the hardcore segregation areas of the country. These were eventually brought into compliance, but it took years and a lot more grassroots efforts and litigation to make it happen.
Like Brown, the Bruen decision made things worse, at least temporarily, in the hardcore anti-2A states. Like places like Virginia and Mississippi after Brown, states like California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and yes – Massachusetts only got worse after Bruen. These states were not going to told what to do, because in their eyes that meant admitting they were wrong about the Second Amendment for decades.
These “cultural corrections” take an incredible amount of time and resources to bring about. Simply filing more litigation is not an easy fix.
In 2018, GOAL, with the financial help of the National Rifle Association, challenged Attorney General Maura Healey’s unilateral change of the Massachusetts “assault weapon” laws. It took several years of federal court challenges, and hundreds of thousands of dollars. In the end, SCOTUS refused to even hear the case. Since then, many have asked why we have not tried again after Bruen?
We may indeed attack it again because of Chapter 135. The reason GOAL has not to this point is the number of cases around the country that are way ahead of is in the process.
The one critical thing the 2A community has to keep in mind is that while SCOTUS gave us an historic decision in Bruen, they have yet to back it up or defend it. Thus, Second Amendment court wins at the highest levels are actually pretty rare.
The lessons here are as follows. Good, well planned and orchestrated litigation is essential in creating historical logical well-reasoned support for the protection and restoration of the Second Amendment. Bad, hasty litigation often creates bad court rulings and places bigger walls in front of us.
Grassroots advocacy is vitally important even if it seems to be an overwhelming task, such as in Massachusetts. When people are fighting for their rights, at no time in history has that been accomplished by staying home and staying silent. Screaming on the internet doesn’t get it done.
GOAL will continue to pursue litigation against Massachusetts laws with credible and reliable legal counsel. It is equally, if not more, important to reenergize our grassroots efforts in order to keep our voices and faces in front to the very people who made this mess. In person advocacy does matter and is effective if enough activists participate.
Listen to audio on Youtube
For several years now, there has been a growing portion of Second Amendment community that wants nothing to do with grassroots advocacy. As we have won a handful of rare Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) rulings, beginning with Heller in 2008, too many 2A proponents have become hyper reliant on litigation. This reliance has only grown faster after the Bruen decision on June 23, 2022.
When the Bruen decision was announced there was premature celebration throughout the 2A community that the fight was finally over. Those of us who understood the history of such rulings knew all too well, the real fight had just begun.
In 1955, SCOTUS issued a ruling in Brown v. Board of Education in 1955. The case against segregation in schools was a huge win for communities of color. However, historians will tell you that things actually got worse in the hardcore segregation areas of the country. These were eventually brought into compliance, but it took years and a lot more grassroots efforts and litigation to make it happen.
Like Brown, the Bruen decision made things worse, at least temporarily, in the hardcore anti-2A states. Like places like Virginia and Mississippi after Brown, states like California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and yes – Massachusetts only got worse after Bruen. These states were not going to told what to do, because in their eyes that meant admitting they were wrong about the Second Amendment for decades.
These “cultural corrections” take an incredible amount of time and resources to bring about. Simply filing more litigation is not an easy fix.
In 2018, GOAL, with the financial help of the National Rifle Association, challenged Attorney General Maura Healey’s unilateral change of the Massachusetts “assault weapon” laws. It took several years of federal court challenges, and hundreds of thousands of dollars. In the end, SCOTUS refused to even hear the case. Since then, many have asked why we have not tried again after Bruen?
We may indeed attack it again because of Chapter 135. The reason GOAL has not to this point is the number of cases around the country that are way ahead of is in the process.
- Snope v. Brown (Maryland) has been in play since Dec. 1, 2020.
- Cheeseman v. Platkin (New Jersey) since June 30, 2022
- Miller v. Bonta (California) since August 15, 2019
The one critical thing the 2A community has to keep in mind is that while SCOTUS gave us an historic decision in Bruen, they have yet to back it up or defend it. Thus, Second Amendment court wins at the highest levels are actually pretty rare.
The lessons here are as follows. Good, well planned and orchestrated litigation is essential in creating historical logical well-reasoned support for the protection and restoration of the Second Amendment. Bad, hasty litigation often creates bad court rulings and places bigger walls in front of us.
Grassroots advocacy is vitally important even if it seems to be an overwhelming task, such as in Massachusetts. When people are fighting for their rights, at no time in history has that been accomplished by staying home and staying silent. Screaming on the internet doesn’t get it done.
GOAL will continue to pursue litigation against Massachusetts laws with credible and reliable legal counsel. It is equally, if not more, important to reenergize our grassroots efforts in order to keep our voices and faces in front to the very people who made this mess. In person advocacy does matter and is effective if enough activists participate.
