Members of the state’s gun lobby and gun control advocates are preparing for an extended legal battle after a federal judge temporarily blocked a high-profile gun bill, championed by Gov. Ned Lamont (D), hours before it was supposed to take effect.
In Bridgeport on Wednesday, Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Kari Dooley issued a preliminary injunction against Connecticut’s House Bill 5043, which would prevent new sales of Glocks and other "convertible pistols" that can be easily converted to automatic fire using a simple device known as a “Glock switch.”
The ban was set to take effect on Thursday, Oct. 1, hours after Dooley’s ruling.
Members of the gun lobby say they warned state Democrats before passage that the bill would face an expensive legal challenge based on the Second Amendment. Gun control advocates say the ruling is part of pattern of anti-gun safety rulings at the federal level.
Connecticut Citizen’s Defense League (CCDL) President Holly Sullivan says the “Glock Bill” not only violates the Second Amendment, it’s redundant.
“It is a felony crime, not only just to convert those firearms, but to even be in possession of a Glock switch,” says Sullivan, “It’s already a banned item.”
“Instead of going after the criminals that commit these felonies and convert these firearms, they banned the firearm itself, which is owned and used by hundreds of thousands of people.”
“This bill was designed to deal with the manufacturers,” says Stacey Mayer, Director of Advocacy and Policy at Connecticut Against Gun Violence (CAGV), “and with a gun that is designed in a way that it can be easily converted into a machine gun.”
The gun company Glock filed the suit seeking the preliminary injunction. The National Shooting Sports Foundation is one of the other plaintiffs.
In the conclusion of her ruling, Judge Dooley writes:
Having concluded that Plaintiffs have demonstrated that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their Second Amendment challenge to HB 5043; that Plaintiffs have demonstrated the likelihood that they will suffer irreparable harm if enforcement of the statute is not enjoined; and that the other factors to be weighed when considering the issuance of injunctive relief favor such relief, Plaintiffs’ Motions for Preliminary Injunctive Relief are GRANTED.
Sullivan criticizes Democrats for passing the bill and using taxpayer money to defend it in court. (State Attorney General William Tong has been defending the bill and says he’s now “evaluating all legal options.”)
Mayer credits Democrats for passing the bill, saying, “They got this bill across the finish line, and they took a meaningful step in improving community safety. Now, we have this industry-funded lawsuit, and it’s undermining the effort, putting this law on hold.”
The U.S. Supreme Court will take up Connecticut’s assault weapons ban in December. Jeremy Stein, the Connecticut-based executive director of States United to Prevent Gun Violence, fears the pattern of rulings following its decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association vs. Bruen, 2022 (which struck down New York’s concealed carry law) suggest it may fall.
“Unfortunately, the temperature of the Supreme Court and courts in general,” says Stein, “I think that we are seeing a lot of laws that would save lives and be good for public safety are being ruled unconstitutional, based on that Supreme Court decision.”
