Florida Carry, Inc. and the Second Amendment Foundation joined forces in the lawsuit against the City of Tallahassee for refusing to repeal ordinances restricting the use of firearms in defiance of Florida’s firearms preemption law.

“We’re happy to partner with Florida Carry on this legal action,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “This is not the first time we have had to take a city to court for violating a state preemption law. Why municipal governments still don’t understand the concept of preemption is a mystery to us”

“Clearly,” Gottlieb observed, “Tallahassee has way over-stepped its authority under state preemption. The Florida Legislature has exclusive domain over firearms regulation. When the law was passed, it nullified all existing, and future, city and county firearm ordinances and regulations.

“Mayor Marks and his colleagues on the city commission knew all of this,” he added, “but they rejected an opportunity to bring the city into compliance in February. Their stubbornness really left us no choice but to join Florida Carry in this action.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMAFaI4UWDk#t=7189

Named as defendants in the Tallahassee case are Mayor John Marks, and City Commissioners Nancy Miller, Andrew Gillum, and Gil Ziffer. SAF and Florida Carry are represented by Jacksonville attorneys Lesley McKinney with McKinney, Wilkes & Mee, and Florida Carry General Counsel Eric J. Friday with Fletcher & Phillips.

Docket Overview: Lower Court Case Number: 37-2014-CA-001168 
Leon County Clerk of the Circuit Court

Lower Court Filings: 

5/2/2014 Plaintiffs' Complaint

8/4/2014 Defendants' Answer

8/4/2014 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and Counter-Complaint

Florida Carry files lawsuit against Broward County for blatant violations of Florida’s law that preempts local gun control.

“Since 2011, Florida Carry has prompted the repeal of anti-gun ordinances and regulations in over 200 Florida jurisdictions, including municipalities, counties, colleges and state agencies,” noted Florida Carry Executive Director Sean Caranna. “Usually the jurisdiction is responsive to our notification that there is a problem and no lawsuit is necessary. It is a rare and unfortunate circumstance when local government leaders decide to willfully break state law, despite the personal penalties. When local officials are willing to knowingly violate the law in order to suppress the rights of law-abiding gun owners, they can expect that we’re going to make them pay for it.”

Broward County has ignored repeated attempts since 2011 by Florida Carry to gain its compliance with state law and left us with no choice but to file this case.  When local officials refuse to stop breaking the law in order to deny the rights of Floridians, Florida Carry will act to demand that people’s rights be protected.

Broward County Administrator Bertha Henry is also named as a defendant in the case. Florida Carry is represented by Miami attorneys Michael T. Davis and Benedict P. Kuehne of The Law Offices of Benedict P. Kuehne, P.A. and Florida Carry General Counsel Eric J. Friday with Fletcher & Phillips of Jacksonville.

Docket Overview: Lower Court Case Number: 06-2014-CA-008532
Broward County Clerk of the Circuit Court

Lower Court Filings: 

5/2/2014 Plaintiffs' Complaint

Florida Supreme Court to Decide if People who act in Self-Defense will continue to be "Guilty Until Proven Innocent".

Because, as observed in Judge Schumann's thoughtful concurring opinion, the burden of proof issue was not the primary focus of the Dennis opinion, we certify the following question for consideration by the Florida Supreme Court:

ONCE THE DEFENSE SATISFIES THE INITIAL BURDEN OF RAISING THE ISSUE, DOES THE STATE HAVE THE BURDEN OF DISPROVING A DEFENDANT’S ENTITLEMENT TO SELF-DEFENSE IMMUNITY AT A PRETRIAL HEARING AS IT DOES AT TRIAL?

5th District Court of Appeals Order and Questions Certified to the Florida Supreme Court

Florida Supreme Court Case Number:  SC13-2312

Florida Carry sues the University of Florida for illegal ban on guns and other defensive weapons in cars and homes

On January 10th, 2014 Florida Carry, Inc. filed a lawsuit against the University Florida (UF), seeking a permanent injunction to protect the rights of students, faculty, and the public from the university's illegal and unconstitutional regulations prohibiting firearms and weapons on all university property. Since 1987 the Florida Legislature has preempted firearms law and issued state-wide licenses to carry for self-defense.  In December Florida Carry won a similar case against the University of North Florida (UNF).  In Florida Carry v. UNF the First District Court of Appeal ruled that "The legislature’s primacy in firearms regulation derives directly from the Florida Constitution... Indeed, the legislature has reserved for itself the whole field of firearms regulation in section 790.33(1)..."  No public college or university has any authority to prevent students and the public from having a functional firearm in places that are constitutionally protected or permitted under state law.

The University of Florida has failed to comply with the court's ruling by doing nothing more than adding an "Intent" footnote to one of its illegal policies. Florida Carry Executive Director Sean Caranna reached out to UF President Bernie Machen in an attempt to avert the need for legal action.  Mr. Caranna's call was returned by the university's General Counsel who refused to take our concerns about UF's illegal policies and regulations seriously and was dismissive of our plea that they work with us to craft a legal set of regulations.  Florida Carry was left with no choice but to file this case.

Any public college or university which attempts to restrict the statutory and fundamental right to keep and bear arms in Florida is subject to enforcement actions by organizations such as Florida Carry. In addition to enforcing the clearly established right of students to lawfully store functional firearms in their personal vehicles on campus, Florida Carry seeks to protect the right to possess firearms and other defensive weapons in the home.  In the landmark 2008 Heller case the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that bans on the possession of functional arms in the home are unconstitutional.  Nationwide, millions of adult university faculty, students, and their families live in university owned or managed housing.  The fact that state housing facilities run by Florida Universities continue to deprive law abiding adults of their fundamental right to keep and bear arms in their homes, years after the clear decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court that such bans are unconstitutional, is unconscionable.

On Wednesday July 30th, 2014 Circuit Court Judge Toby S. Monaco granted motions to dismiss and for summary judgment in favor of his alma mater and granted sovereign immunity to UF President Manchen. The lower court Judge ignored the plain language of multiple Florida firearms laws, multiple binding court cases, turned to blind eye to university policies that are in continued violation, and refused to conduct any analysis of the right to keep and bear arms.  This is the same failure to follow the law and uphold the fundamental right to keep and bear arms that we saw from the lower court in our case against the University of North Florida prior to winning the landmark Florida Carry v. UNF case in the 1st District Court of Appeals late last year.

As before, Florida Carry will appeal to the First District Court of Appeals in this case to protect the rights to keep and to bear arms.

Docket Overview: Lower Court Case Number: 01 2014-CA-000142
Alachua County Clerk of the Circuit Court

Lower Court Filings: 

01/10/2014 - Plaintiff's Complaint
01/31/2014 - Defendants' Motion to Dismiss - Standing
02/21/2014 - Plaintiff's Amended Complaint
04/02/2014 - Defendant Manchen's Motion to Dismiss
04/02/2014 - Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgement
07/16/2014 - Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgement
07/24/2014 - Hearing on Motions
07/30/2014 - Circuit Court's Order:

1. Any and all claims for damages against Defendant Machen are STRICKEN due to Machen’s immunity from suit for such claims. There are presently no claims for relief in the nature of civil fines against Machen. Defendant Machen’s motion to dismiss is otherwise denied.
2. Plaintiff’s “Motor Vehicle” claims against Defendants are DISMISSED due to the absence of any present “case or controversy” invoking this Court’s jurisdiction.
3. Summary judgment is hereby entered in favor of Defendants with respect to Plaintiff’s “Housing Claims”. Defendants are not violating Florida law by recognizing the legislature’s prohibition against firearms in housing located on university property pursuant to § 790.115(2)(a).

08/11/2014 - Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration
08/11/2014 - Plaintiff’s Motion for Rehearing
08/13/2014 - Defendants' Response to Motions for Rehearing and Reconsideration
09/05/2014 - Circuit Court's Order Denying Rehearing/Reconsideration with Clarification
10/06/2014 - Plaintiffs' Notice of Appeal

Docket Overview: Appellate Court Case Number:  1D14-4614
Florida First District Court of Appeal Docket

 Appellate Court Filings: