Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davidsog
The court most certainly determined that carrying you gun in your luggage to be checked was protected under FOPA. The New Jersey Gun Club cannot sue the state of New Jersey as they are by definition....residents of New Jersey and not travellers under the FOPA.
|
I think you're missing something. From pages 6 and 7 of the decision:
Quote:
Although the unwieldy sentence that comprises section 926A is drafted in a roundabout way, on a careful reading its language is clear and unambiguous. It begins by establishing a clear positive entitlement: a person who meets its requirements “shall be entitled ”to transport firearms in certain circumstances. Cf. Gonzaga, 536 U.S. at 287 (contrasting the rights-creating language of “no person ... shall be ... subjected” with language typical of spending clause statutes, e.g., “no funds shall be made available.”). But the part of the sentence that immediately follows expressly conditions this entitlement as only being operative “if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle.” 18 U.S.C. §926A (emphasis supplied).
It is plain from the latter condition that the statute protects only transportation of a firearm in a vehicle, and requires that the firearm and ammunition be neither readily nor directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such vehicle. In particular, the word “such,” in “such transporting vehicle,” by definition refers back to earlier part(s) of the sentence, and the only parts it could possibly refer to are the parts referring to the transportation of a firearm or ammunition. The use of “such” therefore makes clear that the transportation the statute protects must occur in a “transporting vehicle.”
Moreover, if there were any doubt about the statute’s vehicular limitation, the final part of the sentence that follows -- the “Provided” clause -- again makes clear that only vehicular transportation is included in the statutory grant. It states: “Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console.” 18 U.S.C. §926A (emphasis supplied). This clause, on its face, presupposes transportation of the firearm in a vehicle.
It follows from this plain meaning that an ambulatory plaintiff who intends to transit through Newark Airport is outside the coverage of the statute. But it is precisely such people whose alleged rights under section 926A the Association seeks here to vindicate.
|
I could go on at length about what I perceive to be significant flaws in the reasoning underlying the above, but the fact remains that the Third Circuit has determined that the protections of the FOPA do not apply to a passenger who walks into an airport with a firearm in his/her suitcase.
{Edit to add}The case was not decided on the basis that the Association did not have standing. From the footnote on page 4:
Quote:
|
In a prior non-precedential decision, another panel of this Court reversed the District Court’s dismissal of this case on standing grounds and directed the District Court to permit the Association to amend its complaint to allege facts sufficient to demonstrate standing. See Revell v. Port Auth. of N.Y. and N.J., 321 F. App’x 113 (3d Cir. 2009). The Association did so by properly asserting the rights of its non-resident members.
|
So, lack of standing was not the determiner.
From page 13:
Quote:
In light of the plain meaning of the statute, fully corroborated by the legislative history, we hold that section 926A benefits only those who wish to
transport firearms in vehicles — and not, therefore, any of the kinds of “transportation” that, by necessity, would be involved should a person like those represented by the Association wish to transport a firearm by foot through an airport terminal or Port Authority site.
|
This would also suggest that, in the case of a person traveling by automobile through the Third Circuit states who stop for the night at a roadside hotel, the firearm(s) and ammunition must remain in the vehicle during the time the traveler is at the hotel for eating and sleeping.