SACRAMENTO (November 11, 2020) — Firearms coverage Coalition (FPC) introduced today the submitting of a new lawsuit against Sheriff Scott R. Jones and his Sacramento County Sheriff’s branch (SCSD) for violating the public’s rights to access counsel held via public organizations. The case, FPC v. Sheriff Scott Jones, will also be seen at

The lawsuit’s petition and grievance contends that Sheriff Jones and SCSD violated the California Public facts Act and the California constitution through denying FPC’s requests for access to and copies of statistics about firearm confiscations and their policies, including one recent incident where the SCSD labored with the FBI in using California’s “purple flag” laws, also referred to as “Gun Violence Restraining Orders,” to catch firearms from an individual. 

“americans have a correct to understand how the government is imposing its legal guidelines and guidelines, above all in situations that involve the seizure of firearms and the suspension of primary, constitutionally enumerated rights,” stated FPC Director of prison method Adam Kraut. “The defendants’ denial of our requests is peculiarly regarding in gentle of it being a significant depend of extremely good public hobby, and we look forward to finding out what they’re hiding from us and all Californians.”

“The California constitution and state law give a robust right to clear, liable government, and yet the Sacramento County Sheriff’s department has denied and unnoticed the FPC’s requests for statistics regarding Gun Violence Restraining Orders,” FPC’s attorney, Paul Boylan, remarked. “we are hoping that by way of stressful transparency of the SCSD in this case, it’ll curtail future infringements on the public’s rights to entry information held by using public corporations.”

On August 7, 2020, FPC requested the following 4 units of information from SCSD:

  1. All facts and counsel that contain tips about or relate to Orangevale resident Andrew Casarez and the Gun Violence Restraining Order(s) (see, e.g., Cal. Penal Code Sec. 18100, et seq.), warrant(s), and seizure(s) suggested on July 27, 2020 at CBS local and additional discussed on the Volokh Conspiracy at motive.
  2. All facts that are, relate, confer with, or are in any other case applicable to Sacramento County Sheriff’s office guidelines related to Gun Violence Restraining Orders and related petitions, warrants, and seizures.
  3. For the length of January 1, 2020, through the present, or until such time that you produce responsive statistics to us, whichever is later, all Gun Violence Restraining Orders petitioned for and/or in any other case requested by means of the Sacramento County Sheriff’s workplace and/or any of its officers, employees, brokers and/or others working in live performance with it.
  4. For the period of January 1, 2020, throughout the existing, or until such time that you just produce responsive facts to us, whichever is later, all Gun Violence Restraining Orders and related warrants issued or in any other case offered to the Sacramento County Sheriff’s workplace and/or any of its officers, employees, brokers and/or others working in live performance with it.

The request went on to state that “[r]esponsive records can also include however are not constrained to Writings (see, e.g., Cal. facts Code Sec. 250); Petitions/requests; Warrants; body digital camera, police automobile sprint digital camera, or different video, audio, and/or radio recordings; reviews; Statements; Investigations; Findings and/or concepts; [and] Prior disciplinary proceedings for or investigations into any officer worried / present.”

On August 26, 2020, SCSD denied request numbers 1, 3, and 4, and offered an inadequate response to number 2. On behalf of FPC, legal professional Boylan despatched a letter to SCSD on September 18, 2020 that requested more information about the denied requests and once more requested statistics regarding request no. 2. SCSD on no account replied to that letter, thus prompting the litigation to compel the construction of the responsive files.

these days, Firearms coverage Coalition has filed a few foremost federal 2nd amendment lawsuits, together with challenges to New Jersey’s lift ban (Bennett v. Davis), big apple city’s lift ban (Greco v. long island metropolis), the federal ban on the sale of handguns and handgun ammunition by federal firearm licensees (FFLs) to adults below 21 years of age (Reese v. BATFE), and California’s Handgun Ban and “Roster” laws (Renna v. Becerra). FPC also has an upcoming trial in its lawsuit challenging California’s “assault weapons” ban (Miller v. Becerra).To observe these and other criminal cases FPC is actively engaged on, consult with the legal action component of FPC’s web site or comply with FPC on Instagram, Twitter, facebook, YouTube.

Firearms policy Coalition ( is a 501(c)4 nonprofit corporation. FPC’s mission is to protect and safeguard constitutional rights—especially the appropriate to preserve and undergo hands—strengthen individual liberty, and fix freedom through litigation and legal motion, legislative and regulatory action, schooling, outreach, grassroots activism, other classes. FPC law is the nation’s greatest public interest legal team concentrated on second change and adjoining simple rights including freedom of speech and due system, conducting litigation, research, scholarly publications, and amicus briefing, amongst different efforts.