Justice Dept. suit challenging D.C.’s AR-15 ban alarms ex-DOJ attorneys

Former attorneys for the Justice Department and national gun violence prevention organizations say a Trump administration lawsuit seeking Washington’s ban on AR-15s and some other weapons is based on an atypical and “dangerous” use of a federal civil rights law.

D.C. code, since 2009, has prohibited most semi-automatic rifles and certain firearms, including AK-47s and AR-15s, from being registered with the police department, ultimately making possession of these weapons illegal.

The Justice Department, in a lawsuit filed in December, claims that the D.C. Police Department “prevents the possession of Second Amendment-protected firearms” — which the agency says violates a section of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that prohibits any pattern or practice of unconstitutional conduct by law enforcement officers.

DC recently filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. On Friday, Brady United and Giffords Law Center filed an amicus brief in support of the request, alongside more than a dozen former officials from the Justice Department’s civil rights division. Among the signatories are former associate attorney general Vanita Gupta and former deputy attorney general Kristen Clarke, who served in the Biden administration. Gupta also served in the Obama administration.

In the new brief, former attorneys who have enforced the Patterns or Practices Act say the Justice Department is misinterpreting the three-decade-old measure, which they say could harm public safety. They say the law, passed following the 1991 police beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles, was intended to address police misconduct such as excessive force and discriminatory practices, as well as to restore trust among communities affected by systemic law enforcement failures.

Douglas Letter, legal director of Brady United, said the Trump administration was using the provision to challenge Washington police for “simply enforcing a law passed by the people’s representatives,” not for discriminatory or unconstitutional conduct.

“This lawsuit brought by the Trump Justice Department is just an extremely bizarre use of this law,” Letter said in an interview. “Which was not intended to be used to attack statutes and laws, but rather to expose patterns and practices of misconduct by police officers and police departments.”

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday morning.

In its suit, the agency argues that the Supreme Court’s decision in the case District of Columbia v. Heller found that the Second Amendment protects firearms that are “in common use today” and are used for lawful purposes, including self-defense.

“Indeed, Washington’s current semi-automatic firearms ban, which prohibits many commonly used pistols, rifles, or shotguns, is based on little more than aesthetics, appearance, or the ability to attach accessories,” the lawsuit claims.

The District called the lawsuit an unprecedented “face challenge” to a local law.

In the amicus brief, the attorneys detailed the history of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act’s provision cited in the lawsuit and its focus on institutional failures, the Justice Department’s past enforcement of the law and what they say is the unique “start” of the lawsuit against the District.

The former lawyers also say the Trump administration’s lawsuit comes at a time when the Justice Department “proudly announced” it was dismissing investigations into patterns or practices in police departments, including in Louisville and Minneapolis, related to Biden-era findings of unconstitutional discriminatory policing and excessive force.

The AR-15 has become a staple of American culture, The Washington Post previously reported, and a weapon of choice for mass shooters.

“By redirecting federal resources to dismantle Washington’s common-sense laws, the Trump administration is once again showing how it is prioritizing gun industry profits over public safety,” Billy Clark, senior litigation attorney at Giffords Law Center, said in a statement.

Others argue that the guns, used by those who obey the law and for self-defense, should not be denied by the city.

This article originally appeared in The Detroit News: A Justice Department lawsuit challenging D.C.’s AR-15 ban alarms former DOJ lawyers.