Posted: 9/4/2025 6:26:41 PM EDT
|
Brief at the bottom of the link. New Hampshire Leads 25-State Coalition Defending Second Amendment Rights of Law-Abiding Travelers Concord, NH – Attorney General John M. Formella announced today that New Hampshire is leading a coalition of 25 states in filing an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court, urging it to review the constitutionality of Massachusetts’ firearm licensing requirements for nonresidents. “The Second Amendment does not end at the Massachusetts border,” said Attorney General Formella. “Citizens should not face criminal charges simply for exercising their constitutional rights while traveling. Massachusetts’s approach treats nonresidents as second-class citizens, imposes arbitrary and excessive restrictions, and contradicts both historical tradition and Supreme Court precedent. We filed this brief to defend the principle that constitutional rights travel with the individual—not just within their home state, but across the United States.” The brief supports a petition challenging a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, which upheld the Commonwealth’s license-to-carry regime—even when applied to law-abiding out-of-state travelers who cannot reasonably comply with the state’s burdensome permitting process. The case involves a New Hampshire resident who was arrested and charged in Massachusetts after voluntarily disclosing to law enforcement that he was carrying a legally owned firearm, despite lacking a Massachusetts license. Although the trial court dismissed the charges, Massachusetts’s highest court reinstated them, citing the state’s licensing framework. The multistate brief outlines several key concerns: • Unconstitutional Burdens: Massachusetts’s permitting process for nonresidents involves lengthy delays (ranging from 40 to 170 days), high fees, and broad discretionary denial standards based on vague “suitability” criteria. • Lack of Historical Precedent: There is no well-established historical tradition of barring nonresidents from transporting or possessing firearms while traveling. • Federalism and Individual Rights: The Constitution guarantees certain rights, especially those protected by the Second and Fourteenth Amendments—that cannot be subject to differing standards based solely on geography. The coalition urges the United States Supreme Court to grant review and reverse the decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. Joining New Hampshire in this coalition are Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. |
Peace has always been the reign of mediocrities, and pacifism the bleating of a herd of sheep which allow themselves to be led to the slaughterhouse without defending themselves. ~some dead French guy.
|
While I haven't heard anything about the above case, here is SAF going after MA's non res scheme. Multiple plaintiffs from NH, NY, and FL. SAF and MA's GOAL in as well. https://saf.org/cases/lawson-v-campbell/ Filed in August. |
|
Originally Posted By FDC: While I haven't heard anything about the above case, here is SAF going after MA's non res scheme. Multiple plaintiffs from NH, NY, and FL. SAF and MA's GOAL in as well. https://saf.org/cases/lawson-v-campbell/ Filed in August. |
NRA Firearms Instructor
Moved to NH!
Moved to NH!
|
Originally Posted By JCoop: https://i.imgflip.com/a54s9l.jpg Side note, I've met the Dali Lama in the lobby of the Howard Plaza Hotel in Taipei, TW. THis would have been 2000? On topic, I'd be surprised if massholioland would actually stand by USSC decision. They'll find a back door. Or just ignore it. |
"Hey Teacher, if my kid is misbehaving, slap the kid next to him." -diesel1 (May 2024)
|
Originally Posted By LenS: It looks like you have to pay to access any of the documentation. No thanks. Originally Posted By LenS: Originally Posted By FDC: While I haven't heard anything about the above case, here is SAF going after MA's non res scheme. Multiple plaintiffs from NH, NY, and FL. SAF and MA's GOAL in as well. https://saf.org/cases/lawson-v-campbell/ Filed in August. Always have. The original complaint is free though. This looks like the most recent update: 
|
|
Originally Posted By Rooster-X: Side note, I've met the Dali Lama in the lobby of the Howard Plaza Hotel in Taipei, TW. THis would have been 2000? |
For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.
Thomas Jefferson
"He didnt punch anybody. He punched an idea." DrFrige
Thomas Jefferson
"He didnt punch anybody. He punched an idea." DrFrige
|
This seems to contradict the court ruling in this thread: https://www.ar15.com/forums/Hometown/NH-Residents-Rejoice-You-can-now-LEGALLY-Vehicle-Carry-if-Driving-THROUGH-MA-/56-675392/ I'm allegedly good to go from NH, through MA, to a destination in NH. ...but I cannot legally go from NH, through MA, to a destination in any other state? |