D.C. to pay $5.1 million settlement after judge finds Second Amendment violations
BY Herschel Smith
8 months, 1 week ago
D.C. will pay $5.1 million as part of a class-action settlement with gun owners who were arrested under laws that have since been found to violate the Second Amendment, according to the settlement agreement.
U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth gave preliminary approval to the settlement agreement on Monday following years of litigation. Lamberth had previously ruled in September 2021 that D.C. arrested, jailed, prosecuted and seized guns from six people “based on an unconstitutional set of laws” and violated their Second Amendment rights.
The laws — a ban on carrying handguns outside the home and others that effectively banned nonresidents from carrying guns at all in D.C. — have since been struck down in federal court. They were part of a “gun control regime that completely banned carrying handguns in public,” Lamberth wrote in the 2021 ruling.
Now, D.C. will pay a total of $300,000 to the six plaintiffs and $1.9 million in attorneys fees, with the majority of the rest of the money set aside for more than 3,000 people estimated to qualify for the class-action.
The D.C. attorney general’s office declined to comment. Attorneys for the six gun owners did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The settlement agreement follows litigation in several major federal court cases over the last 15 years that have led judges to strike down highly restrictive D.C. gun laws, slowly leading to more legal gun ownership in a city where illegal weapons have dominated.
[ … ]
A succession of court rulings chipped away at other restrictive D.C. laws. In 2014, a federal judge in Palmer v. District of Columbia struck down D.C.’s total ban on carrying handguns in public and enjoined the District from banning nonresidents from legally registering firearms. And in 2017, a federal judge invalidated D.C.’s requirement that people show “good reason” to obtain a concealed-carry permit — significantly opening the door to more legal guns.
In this case, the six plaintiffs — including four non-D.C. residents — were arrested between 2012 and 2014 on gun-related charges. They filed a lawsuit in 2015.
Those arrested include the lead plaintiff, Maggie Smith, a nurse from North Carolina who was pulled over by D.C. police for a routine traffic stop in June 2014, according to court documents. Smith, who had no criminal record, informed officers her car contained a pistol that was licensed in her home state — for which police promptly arrested her, seizing her gun and taking her to jail, where she stayed overnight.
Ah, that “routine traffic stop” that so very often is just a pretext for more invasive actions by the Stasi, and are never really routine.
Well good. I hope this hits them good and hard. Unfortunately this will all be paid by the taxpayers, and the best option would be to shut down city council and all gun registration employees and schemes. Maybe that would save some money. And make things more peaceable in D.C.
On August 30, 2023 at 12:12 am, Nosmo said:
I do appreciate winning the judgment, not least because it is completely justified, but $5.1M is too low by at least one order of magnitude and probably two. The FY 2023 budget is $10.7 billion. $5.1 million doesn’t count as even a drop in that bucket.
Until these judgments, wherever they are won, are large enough to cause real pain and hardship – requiring the shutdown of entire programs and/or city, county or state departments with attendant layoffs – they’re just window dressing. They need to be not just compensatory but also punitive. Very punitive.
On August 30, 2023 at 5:51 am, Joe Blow said:
You highlight one of the problems with the current system that we really aught to take a hard look at changing our tactics on. It has broader implications than just this one case as well.
We here often rail against and lament over-reach by the state. This article is a great example. Citizens sue to regain their lost rights, win, but STILL end up paying (through atty fees, damages, levied against the tax base). The individuals who acted in violation of the law, which they most certainly should have understood if they are enforcing them, suffer no ill consequences to their actions.
We are amazed that Wall street is corrupt when we read articles detailing the 1 million dollar fine they paid on 100 million in illegal activity. The criminal released on his own recognizance re-offends, whocoulddaknowd.
We The People (cuz politicians won’t indict themselves) need to make the system hold the people perpetrating the acts accountable, not the system in which they function. If the systems bears the penalty, the individual will not change. The offender goes to jail, not society. We are punishing the law abiding members by making them pay the burden of the criminal through the tax responsibility.
NOTHING will change until the criminal feels the pain of their actions. Thats why nothing HAS changed. The system is designed to make it so.
On August 30, 2023 at 5:58 am, Joe Blow said:
I agree with Nosmo’s comment above, but in light of what I said below their comment.
Penalties for egregious rights violations should be huge!! Take their guns away, ha! However the pain is not being felt by the individual who committed the infraction.
Punishment is used as a deterrent. Stronger punishment = stronger deterrent. Your dog does something bad so you smack the cat. Will that change the dogs behaviour? This is a problem, people calling for the cat to be beaten harder.
On August 30, 2023 at 9:21 am, Don't mind me. said:
Expect decades of appeals. As for those wanting steeper penalties, the bureaucrats don’t care; it’s not their money, it’s our money. If the architects of these laws were held “personally” liable, then we would see change.