Officials in Suffolk County, New York have told a federal judge they no longer want to defend its suspension of two pistol licenses held by longtime residents of the county, nearly two years after attorney Amy Bellantoni first filed a lawsuit on behalf of the gun owners.
AdvertisementAccording to Bellantoni's original complaint, the licenses were suspended in April, 2021, allegedly because Thomas and Diane LaMarco, the two license holders, "violated the Suffolk County Pistol Licensing Bureau handbook' by not reporting a 2017 visit from police officers to the DeMarco's home for a “mental health assistance” call related to their adult son. Bellantoni and the DeMarco's maintain that Suffolk County police reported the incident to the licensing bureau at the time, but note that the call for assistance was for the couple's adult son, and the license holders were never in need of mental health treatment.
When the DeMarcos' permits were revoked two years ago, police ordered them to surrender their firearms to local authorities, and the couple has essentially been disarmed by the county ever since.
From the time Bellantoni filed the lawsuit on behalf of the DeMarcos in August of 2022, Suffolk County has repeatedly tried to defend its actions, though not very well. In early July the county drew the ire of U.S. District Judge Gary R. Brown, who scolded the county's attorneys in a blistering order that accused Suffolk County of making the "spurious" argument that the Second Amendment rights of the DeMarcos wasn't implicated by the suspension of their pistol licenses.
AdvertisementThe federal judge in a lawsuit challenging gun seizures in Suffolk County, New York is tired of the county's shit: https://t.co/1HT0qLvpse pic.twitter.com/80KqViaVIu
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) July 9, 2024
In his order, Brown declared that "it is obvious that this case involves the proper application of the Second Amendment, and arguments surrounding Bruen are critical to its proper resolution. Indeed, Ms. Zwilling, the Assistant County Attorney handling this case, is well aware of the applicability of the Second Amendment given her work in Torcivia v. Suffolk Cnty."
Moreover, the County's assertion that Bruen is not retroactive is equally preposterous. See, e.g., Passalacqua v. Cnty. of Suffolk. Notably, Ms. Zwilling also represents the County in Passalacqua. Thus, the County is DIRECTED to file a supplemental brief of no more than 10 pages setting forth its position on the proper application of Bruen and United States v. Rahimi to the pending motion within 10 days. Counsel for plaintiffs shall have two weeks to file a response. Given the absence of a good faith basis for the County's position, the Court will, pursuant to Rule 11, award Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees for the preparation of this supplemental brief.
Brown's order not only slapped the county with attorneys' fees, it put Suffolk County on notice that their primary defense was completely invalid in the eyes of the judge. Less than a month after Brown's scathing rebuke, the county is ready to throw in the towel and tap out of the litigation.
AdvertisementUpdate: After a New York federal judge blasted Suffolk County for arguing that the suspension of a pistol license doesn't implicate the Second Amendment and that Bruen doesn't apply if the suspension occurred before it, the county says it "now believes that it would not be wise… https://t.co/SMx9Uocy7O pic.twitter.com/jawojm7uwg
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) July 31, 2024
Suffolk County Attorney Christopher Clayton informed the judge that "the County no longer believes it would be wise to continue litigating the question of whether the alleged policies challenged in this case comport with the Second Amendment." Instead, Clayton now wants a speedy resolution to the lawsuit, including reinstating the DeMarcos' licenses, returning their firearms, and "affording them pecuniary relief".
Brown has now given the DeMarcos until August 5th to respond to the county's offer. I'd love to see them tell Suffolk County to pound sand and continue on with litigation, but depending on how much "pecuniary relief" we're talking about the couple may very well decide to put an end to the lawsuit. At the very least, I hope the judge compels the county to document what policies are being changed and what those changes look like, because Suffolk County officials could easily make some cosmetic tweaks without addressing the underlying issue with stripping people of their right to keep and bear arms for no legitimate purpose whatsoever.
