CRPANews Alert: CRPA Files Important Amicus Brief in Lawsuit Challenging Firearm Prohibition Due to Decades Old Non-Violent Offense of Lying on A Form

Should someone be categorically denied their rights simply because they committed the crime of lying on a form—even where the person received no jail time as a result? That is the question presented in the case of Hatfield v. Sessions, currently pending in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. On Friday, CRPA filed an amicus brief in support of the Plaintiff, Larry Hatfield, who is seeking the return of his rights.

Mr. Hatfield was convicted 28 years ago for lying on forms sent to the Railroad Retirement Board, a felony at the time. He received no prison time and was ordered to pay a meager amount in restitution fees pursuant to his plea agreement. But the conviction, under federal law, prohibits Mr. Hatfield from ever owning a firearm for life. Earlier this year, a federal district court held the federal prohibition as applied to Mr. Hatfield was unconstitutional, and the government appealed.

In support of Mr. Hatfield and other similarly situated individuals, CRPA on Friday filed an important amicus brief highlighting how the denial of Mr. Hatfield’s Second Amendment rights fails judicial scrutiny. The brief also illustrates how the government has not shown that banning Mr. Hatfield from owning or possession firearms will serve any public safety interest.

To stay up-to-date on the Hatfield case, as well as other important firearm related litigation, make sure you are subscribed to NRA and CRPA email alerts. And be sure to visit the NRA-ILA California dedicated webpage at www.StandAndFightCalifornia.com and the CRPA webpage at www.CRPA.org.