Gun Safety Group Sues for Post-Parkland Federal Lobbying Records
The lawsuit seeks records of gun-lobby communications with the federal government after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting.
October 17, 2019 at 03:13 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Corporate Counsel
A nonpartisan gun safety group filed a Freedom of Information Act suit seeking records of federal employees' communications with the National Rifle Association and other gun lobbyists after the mass school shooting in Parkland.
The federal suit filed Wednesday by Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund states, "The requested records will shed light on topics of vital national importance. Everytown seeks to learn the extent to which the DOJ's policy choices are informed or influenced by gun lobby access to government decision-makers, and why certain gun safety initiatives have been abandoned."
The 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School left 17 dead. Broward Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer issued an order Thursday setting a Jan. 27 trial date for former student Nikolas Cruz in the attack with an AR-15 style rifle, which prompted changes in Florida gun laws weeks later.
The records lawsuit alleges the Justice Department failed to produce the records in response to 18 months of requests. The department, which usually does not talk about ongoing litigation, had no comment by deadline on the lawsuit filed in Washington.
"The public has a right to know what these public records contain," Everytown's in-house counsel Eric Tirschwell said Thursday. Tirschwell oversees 13 litigators as managing director of litigation and national enforcement policy at Everytown Law, the litigation arm of the support fund.
"The Trump administration's choices on gun policy have major consequences for public safety, and the public deserves to know the extent to which the gun lobby is influencing those choices," Tirschwell said.
The suit also seeks records about the abandonment of gun violence prevention initiatives launched during the Obama administration.
The suit alleges the Justice Department's "failure to provide any substantive response about whether or not it will comply with Everytown's requests, which have been pending for a year and a half, serves to constructively exhaust Everytown's administrative remedies." In other words, Everytown cannot appeal the department's decision until a decision is issued.
The suit details numerous contacts between Everytown and the department offering to narrow the scope of the requests and other measures to expedite production, but so far to no avail.
Everytown is asking the court to:
- Order the Justice Department to disclose the requested records.
- Set a schedule for producing requested records.
- Award Everytown its costs and reasonable attorney fees.
- Expedite the proceeding.
The suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Everytown lawyers Alla Lefkowitz and Aaron Esty, based in New York.
They were joined in the complaint by Murad Hussain, a partner in the Washington office of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, and other attorneys from the law firm. Hussain said he would let the complaint speak for itself.
Everytown Law calls itself the "largest team of litigators in the country dedicated full-time to advocating to advance gun safety in the courts and through the criminal and civil justice systems."
In ongoing litigation around the country, it is challenging gun laws it considers dangerous, defending gun safety laws in Second Amendment and preemption challenges, and representing survivors of gun violence seeking accountability and reform.
In an August ruling in a separate lawsuit, Everytown Law won a major federal court decision that overturned the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' refusal to produce data from its firearms tracing database. The decision is the first federal court decision to hold a 2003 congressional appropriations law known as the Tiahrt Rider cannot be used to withhold data under the Freedom of Information Act.
Related coverage:
Florida Appeals Court Rules Against Middle School Student Accused of Posting Threatening Content Online
FDLE Officials Seeks Money to Help Curb Homegrown Attacks
Florida Appeals Court Upholds Constitutionality of 'Red Flag' Law
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSpecial Counsel Jack Smith Prepares Final Report as Trump Opposes Its Release
4 minute readNorth Carolina Courts Switch to Digital, Face Extreme Weather in 2024
'Serious Disruptions'?: Federal Courts Brace for Government Shutdown Threat
3 minute readDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 2'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 3Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
- 4On the Move and After Hours: Meyner and Landis; Cooper Levenson; Ogletree Deakins; Saiber
- 5State Budget Proposal Includes More Money for Courts—for Now
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250