Estimated reading time: 3 minutes
The Second Amendment Foundation is back in court pushing against the federal government’s latest attempt to limit the impact of a major victory won earlier this fall.
SAF and its partners have filed a new brief responding to the government’s effort to shrink the scope of the injunction against the U.S. Post Office carry ban, a ban a federal judge already ruled unconstitutional in September.
That ruling, issued by the Northern District of Texas, struck down the prohibition on carrying at post offices and on postal property, and barred the government from enforcing it against the plaintiffs, including SAF members.
SEE ALSO: Post Office Gun Ban Struck Down
Instead of accepting that decision, the government immediately moved to restrict the injunction to only a tiny sliver of individuals: the named plaintiffs and only those SAF and FPC members who were already verified members when the case was originally filed.
SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut called out the government’s strategy, noting that officials are “fighting tooth and nail to continue enforcing an unconstitutional law against as many people as possible.”
Kraut also pushed back on the DOJ’s claim that it would be “impossible” to tell who is covered by the injunction without a membership list.
As he put it, “If officials want to know if someone found to be carrying at a post office is a SAF member they can simply ask.”
SAF’s brief points out the obvious flaw in the government’s argument: if asking someone whether they’re covered by the injunction somehow counts as “enforcing” the ban, then no amount of member-identification info would fix the problem.
The government’s position, in other words, makes no practical sense.
The lawsuit, FPC v. Bondi, was filed in June 2024 and challenges the long-standing prohibition on carrying firearms in U.S. Post Offices and on postal property. SAF is joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition and two private citizens in the effort.
SEE ALSO: Anti-Gunners Were Wrong! Ohio Sees Drop in Crime Post-Constitutional Carry
SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb emphasized that these cases are brought on behalf of all SAF members, and noted the nationwide impact of the ruling.
“A Federal District Judge has declared the law unconstitutional,” Gottlieb said, “and yet the government’s knee-jerk reaction is to continue enforcing it against as many Americans as possible. Decades of settled case law says that it’s wrong.”
SAF’s fight now centers on ensuring the court’s injunction protects everyone it was intended to—and preventing the government from rewriting the boundaries of a constitutional win.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
Available on GunsAmerica Now
is a seasoned outdoorsman, lifelong hunter, and the kind of guy who’d rather track whitetails than scroll social media. As an editor for GunsAmerica, he’s got a sharp eye for spotting both solid gear and bad gun laws. Whether he’s deep in the woods or deep in editorial deadlines, Larry brings a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach to firearms, hunting, and the great American tradition of self-reliance. If there’s a hot debate on gun rights or the latest in hunting tech, you can bet Larry’s got an opinion—and it’s probably backed up with both facts and field experience.
Experience:
– Licensed Bowhunter, Hunter, and Trapper – Experienced in ethical hunting and wildlife conservation.
– Concealed Carry Permit Holder (NYS & AZ) – Trained and licensed to carry in multiple states.
– 2A Journalist – Covering firearms legislation, Second Amendment issues, and gun rights for over a decade.
– Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Certified to provide emergency medical care in the field.
– Field-Tested Gear Reviewer – Hands-on experience with firearms, optics, and hunting tech.
Not being allowed to carry a firearm in Federal facilities, except for law enforcement, is standard policy. Most federal buildings these days have metal detectors at the entrance. I am actually surprised that in one comment below the person wrote ” military bases (well the one i visited) told me that the gun has to be locked in the glove box.” After 23 years on active duty and now 17 years of civil service working on a military base I have as of yet to visit a base where the people are allowed to have or transport firearms except under special circumstances. Other than security, of course, in order to bring a weapon on base the individual must have specific permission from the base commander. For instance, if you live in base housing you will obtain paperwork which allows you to transport the weapon to/from the armory where it is stored. I understand the issue people are having about not being able to go to the post office armed. Afterall, this is something that some people do regularly like going to the grocery store. And yes, I whole heartedly agree that the problem is not with the law-abiding citizen who wants to exercise their 2A rights, but obviously with the criminal element who cares less about the law and is not going to pay attention to any signs or your rights or mine. So, I guess we then have to make a decision. Do we break the law anyway and go in armed and take our chances? If you feel better/safer doing that and believe that you are justified, then so be it. I can tell you that if I enter the base where I work with a weapon in my vehicle and I should get stopped at the gate on a random search, which I and everyone else are subject to, and a weapon is found I will be arrested. The long term ramifications are I will lose my security clearance, my job, and may very well face a fine and imprisonment. And, of course, lose any retirement. So, I personally, have made the decision to abide by the laws and regulations. Sometimes cooler heads must prevail. But I promise, if they ever do try to come and take my guns I will stand ready and armed.
i was going to a reserve base to get my secure i.d., since my glovebox don’t lock i secured it in the trunk instead….. you got me i thought it was odd also but since i’m retired they let me bring it on and since i don’t like leaving it at home it was fine with me.
Wait WHAT??? I didn’t even know there was a law against carrying in a post office. Oh sure there was some nonsense on the door but who reads that idiotic claims? I carry wherever I go, sign or no sign. My doctor’s office has such a sign on it’s door and I had to laugh because at one point I showed her my pistol and she asked about it’s quality and reliability instead of having me arrested.
What the people who put up such laws may not understand but certainly want to curtail my rights is that if I disarm before going into such an establishment then THEY are responsible for my safety while I’m in there. They also don’t care that should some nutcase come in while I’m in their facility and start shooting I, or some other carrying person, will put the nutcase down long before the police can get there.
They also don’t understand that nothing anyone can say to me, any dirty name or aspersion cast on myself will cause me to get angry enough to shoot someone. My first wife made me so angry several, make that many times to the point that I simply couldn’t say words but I never hit her or shot her. I eventually helped her move in with her boyfriend. Worked out great.
i looked into this and after the texas/florida rulings the usps stated that they are not changing policy, which also states that no guns on any part of the property, even in your parked car or driving thru! va has the same rules and i suspect all federal entities have the same. military bases (well the one i visited) told me that the gun has to be locked in the glove box. school zones are similar and i often wonder if that includes the speed zone on the street…
The 1934 law was amended in 1972 regarding carrying guns on post office property. It wasn’t long after that, the 1980s, that we had a record decade of people “going postal”. It’s like those stupid signs they hang up stating you’re not allowed to partake in illegal activities on these premises… Obviously written by an idiot liberal. Signs are not a deterrent nor do they prevent illegal activities… They merely inform people. It’s up to the people whether they want to follow those rules.
Crazy people are going to shoot innocent people regardless of what the signs say and regardless of what the law reads. Only an idiot would blame the spoon for making them fat!
One question for you liberals… With all the mental illnesses of all the current pussies in this country with social anxiety and other ridiculous mental problems… why weren’t more mental health facilities and insurance coverage enacted to help cover that? Quit blaming the spoon!
and of course they will arrest, file charges, take guns, and set a court date, so you can prove you were allowed access.