Commuters should be able to carry concealed handguns on public transit in Washington, D.C., according to a lawsuit levied against the district prompted by a Supreme Court ruling last week that renewed questions on where one can carry guns in public.
Three district residents and one Virginia resident filed a lawsuit against Mayor Muriel Bowser and Metropolitan Police Department Chief Robert Contee on Thursday, arguing the city’s law banning firearms on public transportation is unconstitutional. Although public transit has changed drastically since “the founding of the nation,” the Second Amendment enshrines the right to carry firearms whenever “citizens [travel] from their homes,” the lawsuit reads.
SUPREME COURT RULES NEW YORK’S STRICT CONCEALED CARRY LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
“There is not a tradition or history of prohibitions of carrying firearms on public transportation vehicles,” the suit reads. “In short, there is no basis to label the Metro as a sensitive area.”
The lawsuit comes in response to a Supreme Court ruling last week that reversed a lower court decision upholding New York’s 108-year-old law that limited who can obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun in public. In the 6-3 decision, justices voiced skepticism at the law’s requirement to demonstrate a “proper cause” for obtaining a license.
Going further, Justice Clarence Thomas argued there is “no other constitutional right” that requires an individual to demonstrate some sort of special need to government officers to obtain a concealed carry permit. However, jurisdictions could ban concealed firearms in “sensitive places” — opening the door for legal battles as to what defines such a place.
District law prohibits residents from carrying concealed firearms in several places, including on the subway and buses. While most of the existing restrictions (such as weapon bans in government buildings, schools, and restaurants) are justifiable, it’s unconstitutional to prohibit carrying firearms on public transit because they are not sensitive, according to the lawsuit.
“Even if the public transportation vehicles could be considered ‘sensitive areas,’ the prohibition on licensed carry on such vehicle is a substantial infringement on licensees’ Second Amendment rights,” the lawsuit reads. “This is especially the case as to persons of limited means lacking access to alternative transportation. … The practical effect is that persons who need to travel around the District via the Metro are disarmed for the entirety of their journey. This is true despite that it is technically possible to transport a handgun on the Metro.”
The suit may face an uphill battle in the district, as Washington Attorney General Karl Racine has indicated he would fight pro-gun rights litigation while he remains in office. Racine is set to step down after his term ends in January 2023.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“OAG will continue to defend the District’s common-sense gun regulations and keep District residents safe,” Racine said in a statement. “As the Supreme Court said, the Second Amendment is not a license to keep and carry any weapon in any manner for any purpose.”
The MPD declined to give a statement to the Washington Examiner because the agency does not comment on pending litigation. Bowser’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
