HARRISBURG (TNS) — Pennsylvania Attorney General Michelle Henry has joined 20 other state attorneys general in a court case to defend a key part of federal firearms law that prevents the interstate transfer of guns outside of licensed dealers.
Henry and the other top law enforcement officials filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case United States of America v. Perez, which was originally heard in federal district court in New York and has been appealed to the Second Circuit.
The defendant in the case has argued that the federal law at issue is a violation of his Second Amendment rights – but Henry and the other attorneys general argue it is permissible under existing legal precedent and crucial to maintaining public safety in their states.
“Preventing guns from crossing state lines — except when federally allowed — will keep guns from getting into the wrong hands through unlawful transfers like straw purchases,” Henry said in a statement Thursday.
“My Office will continue our efforts to combat gun violence by exposing and holding bad actors culpable for violating the laws,” Henry said. “I am thankful for the opportunity to work collaboratively with other Attorneys General to encourage strong gun regulations on the state and federal level.”
The case centers around New York resident Steven Perez. In 2021, Perez was arrested in the Bronx for illegal possession of a handgun, and was arrested again two weeks later when police in Massachusetts pulled over a group of self-proclaimed militia members, resulting in a tense stand-off.
While individual states control the transfer of guns between residents within the state, federal interstate commerce law governs the sale of firearms across state lines. In those cases, federal law requires all transfers of non-antiques to go through a Federal Firearms License (FFL) holder.
In the Perez case, authorities found that he had engaged in “straw purchasing” by having third parties buy guns in South Carolina on his behalf, allowing him to obtain weapons without going through a background check with a New York federal license holder or having any record of sale in his home state.
In district court, federal attorneys successfully argued that the gun transfer laws are constitutional. The rules apply to commercial activity, not to the basic right of arms possession found in the Second Amendment, the government argued, and the laws have sufficient historical precedent to pass muster under the U.S. Supreme Court’s findings in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
Henry and her fellow attorneys general voiced support for these arguments in their legal brief, and noted that their states have a compelling interest in the matter given that much of their state-level firearms regulations are predicated on the federal transfer system.
If these laws were to be found unconstitutional on appeal, “the already troubling number of out-of-state guns used to commit crimes in [the authors’] states would almost certainly rise,” the attorneys general wrote.
An increase in interstate gun trafficking “would have a disastrous effect” on their states, the brief continued, given that “studies have repeatedly shown that guns sold from out of state are more likely to be associated with criminal activity as compared to guns that originate within the state, particularly among youth offenders.”
Federal attorneys have requested oral argument in the case to be scheduled for later this year or early 2025, according to the court docket.
