Second Amendment advocates went to federal court Tuesday to challenge the federal government’s ban on carrying firearms in post offices, saying it’s an unconstitutional limit on the right to bear arms.
The lawsuit, brought in federal court in Texas, argues that the ban cannot survive the Supreme Court’s new approach to gun litigation, which holds that only policies that would have been countenanced by the founding era can survive constitutional scrutiny.
The Firearms Policy Coalition and the Second Amendment Foundation said the founders envisioned restrictions at polling places, legislative assemblies and courthouses — all places where the federal government already provides its own security. But none of those are analogous to post offices.
“The federal government does not comprehensively secure post offices, so it cannot ban carry there,” the groups said.
The groups said the prohibition is a burden on millions of gun owners who might, in the course of their day, have a reason to visit a post office and who are told they cannot carry their weapon.
“There is no well-established, representative historical analogue to justify this regulation, which violates the Second Amendment,” said Adam Kraut, executive director of the Second Amendment Foundation.
The Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in the Bruen case, which established the historical test, has forced a major rethink of gun laws.
Gun rights supporters have challenged laws imposing limits on types of firearms that can be obtained, categories of people banned from possessing a weapon and restrictions on where guns can be carried.
The Supreme Court is considering a case involving a prohibited person, with a ruling due any day.
The new lawsuit names Attorney General Merrick Garland as the defendant.
The Washington Times has reached out to the Justice Department for this report.
Federal law includes language banning firearms at federal facilities, and the federal regulations include a specific ban on storing or carrying a gun on “postal property.” Both carry potential jail time for violations.
Among the plaintiffs in the new lawsuit is George Mandry, who runs a small business in Texas and says he has to limit his post office visits because he has to disarm himself every time he enters.
That’s a burden because his customers sometimes pay in money orders he needs to cash at the post office.
• Stephen Dinan can be reached at sdinan@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.