Tensions rose this week between a district court in Louisiana and two pro-gun groups after the court demanded the release of members’ names.
As part of a ruling in Reese v. ATF, the court demanded that both the Second Amendment Foundation and Firearm Policy Coalition turn over their member lists.
The case challenged a federal law preventing FFLs from selling or transferring handguns to individuals under the age of 21. The original order, issued on October 10, offered relief to members of gun groups living within the Fifth Circuit (Texas and Mississippi), but requested that the plaintiff organizations turn over their membership data.
“Within twenty-one days of issuance of this Judgment, those Plaintiffs…shall provide to Defendants a verified list of their members as of November 6, 2020,” the order read.
Both gun rights groups balked at the idea, reassuring their members that no membership information would be turned over.
“It’s preposterous to think we would release any type of member data to anyone,” SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said in a news release. “We want to make it extremely clear – we will never release the private data of SAF supporters to the government, full stop. That’s akin to letting the proverbial fox in the henhouse and will never happen. Of that you can be assured.”
The Department of Justice joined the FPC and SAF in requesting an amended order that excludes member data.
Four days later, the court vacated the original order – meaning membership lists are safe from prying eyes.
“Luckily, the court responded to our joint motion promptly and vacated its original order. With that order vacated and a phone conference forthcoming as to the proper scope of relief, it appears we will have more updates on the Reese order in the near future,” SAF Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack added.
What do you think of the fight over membership lists? Let us know in the comments below. Want more news? Check out our News Category with all the latest updates.
2 Leave a Reply
glad you noted the DoJ joined plaintiffs in pushing back on judge's order to produce member lists, unlike so many YouTube channels who falsely, dishonestly accused DoJ of asking the judge to issue the offending, unconstitutional order (NAACP v Alabama 1958) and attacking the most pro-2A administration since the early 1800s
File this with the multitude of “Why Are We Even Talking About This???” subjects we’ve seen in the news the past decade. Regardless, good on SAF for calling BS on this farce.