Federal Judge Grants Temporary Restraining Order on 3-D Printed Guns
U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik of the Western District of Washington granted a temporary restraining order to nine state attorneys general who sought in a lawsuit on Monday to permanently stop those files from being shared nationwide.
July 31, 2018 at 06:48 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
A federal judge has blocked a website from distributing files that could be used to create guns with a 3-D printer. U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik of the Western District of Washington granted a temporary restraining order to nine state attorneys general who sought in a lawsuit on Monday to permanently stop those files from being shared nationwide. Defense Distributed, a private defense firm, planned to make several printable gun designs available online for free on Wednesday. Lasnik's order will prevent those files from being shared for the time being. The lawsuit was filed against the U.S. Department of State, which reversed a regulation last week that originally banned such files from being shared. The agency previously believed that distributing those files could be counterproductive to national security and foreign policy interests, according to the lawsuit. That changed when the State Department entered into a settlement with Defense Distributed in June. The company had sued the department for its position on the dissemination of those files, calling it a violation of free speech protections. The federal agency decided in a settlement with Defense Distributed that it would allow temporary modification to the rule to allow those files to be shared. The states claim in their lawsuit that the federal agency violated the Administrative Procedure Act by not giving proper notice or explanation of its decision. The states also claim the action violates their right to enact their own gun laws, some of which would be more difficult to enforce with printable firearms, they said. The federal agency was required to give 30 days' notice to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Foreign Relations in the Senate, according to the lawsuit. Rep. Eliot Engel, D-New York, who represents parts of the Bronx and Westchester County, said in a press release two weeks ago that the House committee had not been given notice. He's the ranking Democrat on that committee. The states also argue that the State Department's action is illegal because it allows “any United States person” to print a 3-D gun using the files. That would allow guns to be printed by individuals who are not allowed to manufacture, possess, or sell a firearm, which would violate state and federal laws, according to the states. A third cause of action claims that the federal government has not explained why it chose to allow the files to be shared. The State Department has not released any reports or analyses on the issue, the states said, and they have not considered the threat to public safety and national security. The states also claim that allowing those files to be shared would contradict their own gun laws. New York has among the strictest gun laws in the country, for example. The state has outlawed semi-automatic weapons with certain features and also regulates the possession of firearms by mentally ill residents. The lawsuit argues the state's laws would essentially be nullified by allowing individuals to obtain weapons that contradict the state's laws with a 3-D printer. Defense Distributed, which is also named as a defendant in the lawsuit, is being represented by Josh Blackman, an attorney from Houston. In a letter to Lasnik sent Tuesday morning, Blackman wrote that granting injunctive relief to the states by preventing the files from being shared would violate the free speech rights of every U.S. citizen. “Granting the proposed injunctive relief would not only silence the three named Defendants, but it would immediately censor over three hundred million Americans,” Blackman wrote. “Today, the validity of nationwide injunctions is subject to a robust debate. But never before has any court entertained a global injunction on the freedom of speech of all Americans.” Blackman also argued that the State Department was not required to give notice to Congress or an explanation of its decision because the settlement granted a unique license to Defense Distributed to share the files. The State Department, in a statement issued Tuesday, said it agreed to settle the matter in the interest of national security and foreign policy of the United States. It further said the U.S. Department of Justice had been consulted on the settlement. A State Department spokesman also stressed that its role in the matter was to regulate the export of firearms and related technical data, not to pursue a policy on domestic gun regulation. “Many anti-gun politicians and members of the media have wrongly claimed that 3-D printing technology will allow for the production and widespread proliferation of undetectable plastic firearms,” said Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action. “Federal law passed in 1988, crafted with the NRA's support, makes it unlawful to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive an undetectable firearm.” New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo also announced a cease and desist letter to Defense Distributed on Tuesday that would prevent internet users with an IP address from New York from accessing the company's files for 3-D printing guns. The temporary restraining order granted by Lasnik to the attorneys general nullified that request.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 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 AllJudge OKs 'Oversized' Brief Defending Trump Election Interference Prosecution
4 minute readDOJ Files Antitrust Suit Against Visa Alleging It Thwarts Payment-Processing Rivals
SEC Lacks Regulatory Clarity, Consensus on Crypto, GOP Commissioners Say
3 minute read5th Circuit Urged to Overturn Precedent in First Amendment, Book Removal Case
Trending Stories
- 1'I'm Staying Everything': Texas Bankruptcy Judge Halts Talc Trials Against J&J
- 2What We Know About the Kentucky Judge Killed in His Chambers
- 3Judge Blasts Authors' Lawyers in Key AI Suit, Says Case Doomed Without Upgraded Team
- 4Ex-Prosecutor and Judge Fatally Shot During Attempted Arrest on Federal Corruption Charges
- 5Federal Judge Won't Stop Title IX Investigation Into Former GMU Law Professor
Who Got The Work
Burr & Forman partner Garry K. Grooms has entered an appearance for 4M Acquisitions and Wallace D. Tweden in a pending environmental lawsuit. The action, filed July 22 in Tennessee Middle District Court by the McKellar Law Group and Mark E. Martin LLC on behalf of Tennessee Riverkeeper, contends that the defendant's violated the Clean Water Act and Tennessee Water Quality Control Act by allowing for the discharge of pollutants into waters of the U.S. without obtaining a National Pollutant Discharge permit. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Aleta A. Trauger, is 3:24-cv-00886, Tennessee Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Tweden et al.
Who Got The Work
Ramsey M. Al-Salam, Gene W. Lee and Stevan R. Stark of Perkins Coie have entered appearances for R-Pac International in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The case, filed Aug. 12 in New York Southern District Court by PinilisHalpern LLP and Friedman Suder & Cooke on behalf of Adasa Inc, asserts a single patent related to wireless sensors used for tagging products. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, is 1:24-cv-06102, Adasa Inc. v. R-Pac International LLC.
Who Got The Work
Walmart has tapped lawyer Nicole M. Wright of Zausmer PC to defend a pending product liability lawsuit. The action was filed Aug. 12 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Wolfe Trial Lawyers on behalf of a plaintiff claiming burns from a defective propane tank. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Matthew F. Leitman, is 2:24-cv-12100, Hill v. Ferrellgas, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Kevin Simpson and James Randall of Winston & Strawn have stepped in to represent Comcast in a pending consumer class action. The case, filed Aug. 11 in Georgia Northern District Court by Kaufman PA, contends that the defendant placed pre-recorded debt collection phone calls to the plaintiff in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge J.P. Boulee, is 1:24-cv-03553, Pond v. Comcast Cable Communications LLC.
Who Got The Work
Potter Anderson & Corroon partners Christopher N. Kelly and Kevin R. Shannon have stepped in to represent cloud computing company Fastly and its top executives in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 23 in Delaware District Court by deLeeuw Law and Bragar Eagel & Squire on behalf of Mark Sweitzer, accuses the defendant of failing to disclose that revenue growth in 2023 was primarily driven by a 'consolidation trend' in which companies simplified operations by reducing the number of content delivery network vendors under management, thereby reducing competition and increasing the defendant's market share. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gregory B. Williams, is 1:24-cv-00969, Sweitzer v. Nightingale et al.
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