Tweet
Roe v. United States
Eastern District of California
Judge: Dale Drozd
1:19-cv-00270
Eastern District of California
Judge: Dale Drozd
1:19-cv-00270
From the complaint:
This is an action to challenge the policies, practices, customs, and procedures of either (or both) the United States Government and the State of California in their interpretation and implementation of statutory law and various regulations relating to exercising Second Amendment rights by persons; who at one time in their life, were subject to some version of a mental health hold, and for whom there is no current, constitutionally valid finding that they are a danger to themselves or others.
To the extent that these government entities are correctly interpreting federal and/or state law, this suit seeks a judgment from this Court declaring those statutes and/or regulations violate the United States Constitution to the extent those laws and regulations impose a lifetime ban on exercising a fundamental right, with no mechanism for restoration of that right.
The exact date of JANE ROE #1's alleged mental health hold is unknown, but probably occurred in 1988/1989.
JANE ROE #1was living with her parents in New Jersey at the time. She was 15 or 16years old. She believes the hospital where she was treated was Summit Oaks Hospital in Summit, New Jersey.
Upon inquiry by JANE ROE #1 the hospital in question could provide no record of her being a patient there at any time. Nor does the hospital have any records of any adjudication, or due process hearing, relating to any commitment or mental health pathology.
JANE ROE #1 was a minor at the time of the treatment. She does not recall being appointed an attorney or guardian ad litem. She does not recall being given notice of a hearing, its consequences, nor being advised of appellate rights.
JANE ROE #1 attempted to purchase a firearm in January of 2015. She was denied a purchase based on the California Background Check System for firearm purchases which utilizes federal resources and applies federal law in addition to state law in determining firearm purchase eligibility.
A February 10, 2015 letter from the California Department of Justice -Bureau of Firearms (CA-DOJ-BOF) indicates that JANE ROE #1 has no criminal history that would disqualify her from exercising her Second Amendment rights.
A February 14,2015 letter from the CA-DOJ-BOF indicates that the Federal Bureau of Investigations - National Instant Check System (FBI-NICS) database is the cause of the denial.
JANE ROE #1 was honorably discharged from the United States Army on or about January 14, 1998. During her service she was awarded: Army Achievement Medal, Joint Meritorious Unit Award, Army Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, and Army Service Ribbon. She received firearm training in the United States Army and used various small arms while on active duty.
JANE ROE #1 desires to exercise her Second Amendments rights to acquire, keep and bear firearms, but is being prevented from doing so by the actions of the Defendants.
To the extent that these government entities are correctly interpreting federal and/or state law, this suit seeks a judgment from this Court declaring those statutes and/or regulations violate the United States Constitution to the extent those laws and regulations impose a lifetime ban on exercising a fundamental right, with no mechanism for restoration of that right.
The exact date of JANE ROE #1's alleged mental health hold is unknown, but probably occurred in 1988/1989.
JANE ROE #1was living with her parents in New Jersey at the time. She was 15 or 16years old. She believes the hospital where she was treated was Summit Oaks Hospital in Summit, New Jersey.
Upon inquiry by JANE ROE #1 the hospital in question could provide no record of her being a patient there at any time. Nor does the hospital have any records of any adjudication, or due process hearing, relating to any commitment or mental health pathology.
JANE ROE #1 was a minor at the time of the treatment. She does not recall being appointed an attorney or guardian ad litem. She does not recall being given notice of a hearing, its consequences, nor being advised of appellate rights.
JANE ROE #1 attempted to purchase a firearm in January of 2015. She was denied a purchase based on the California Background Check System for firearm purchases which utilizes federal resources and applies federal law in addition to state law in determining firearm purchase eligibility.
A February 10, 2015 letter from the California Department of Justice -Bureau of Firearms (CA-DOJ-BOF) indicates that JANE ROE #1 has no criminal history that would disqualify her from exercising her Second Amendment rights.
A February 14,2015 letter from the CA-DOJ-BOF indicates that the Federal Bureau of Investigations - National Instant Check System (FBI-NICS) database is the cause of the denial.
JANE ROE #1 was honorably discharged from the United States Army on or about January 14, 1998. During her service she was awarded: Army Achievement Medal, Joint Meritorious Unit Award, Army Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, and Army Service Ribbon. She received firearm training in the United States Army and used various small arms while on active duty.
JANE ROE #1 desires to exercise her Second Amendments rights to acquire, keep and bear firearms, but is being prevented from doing so by the actions of the Defendants.
2/25/19: Complaint
3/31/20: First Amended Complaint
Comment