Attorney General John Formella filed a brief supporting a legal challenge that seeks to cover New Hampshire residents under its own firearm laws even when outside the state.
A district court in Lowell, Mass. ruled that its state’s laws could not be applied to two New Hampshire residents who were charged with carrying firearms without licenses. The suit climbed the ladder to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, where Formella filed the brief.
The cases involve Dean Donnell Jr. and Philip Marquis, two New Hampshire residents who were arrested separately for possessing firearms and ammunition. Donnell was also charged with having a large capacity feeding device and for operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol.
Judge John Coffey, who presides over the Lowell District Court, dismissed those cases last year, saying Massachusetts’ requirement of non-residents to gain licenses to carry was unconstitutional. Both suits were appealed by the Commonwealth and now face a decision by its Supreme Judicial Court.
“By challenging Massachusetts’ restrictive firearm laws, we are affirming that constitutional freedoms should not be undermined by inconsistent and overly burdensome regulations,” Formella said in a press release. “This is all about ensuring that responsible gun owners can protect themselves without fear of unjust legal consequences when they cross state borders.”
New Hampshire is an open carry state, meaning any resident who’s able to legally own a firearm can carry one without a license or permit. Because travel between the two states is frequent, Formella said, Granite Staters and other non-Massachusetts residents shouldn’t face felony consequences for carrying a gun while visiting there.
Massachusetts’ temporary firearm licensing requirements include an extensive vetting process of state, federal, fingerprint-based and mental health background checks. It costs $100 to apply and can take up to 90 days to receive the permit. Massachusetts also requires non-resident temporary license holders to attend a basic safety course. These be can renewed every year.
Formella said it’s unfair to subject citizens of a constitutional carry state to the laws of one with some of the strictest gun regulations in the country.
“Strict application of Massachusetts’ firearm statutes imposes on many New Hampshire citizens, particularly those living close to the border with Massachusetts, something of a Hobbesian choice: lay down your right to armed self-defense upon entry into Massachusetts or face felony charges that carry harsh penalties and mandatory imprisonment,” Formella wrote in the brief.
He also argues there’s no historical tradition of prosecuting out-of-state visitors under a state’s firearm laws. In the appeal filing, the district attorney for Middlesex County asserts that there is historical precedent for Massachusetts’ licensing laws, and that that’s enough. Massachusetts has the authority to enforce its laws on anyone within its borders, according to the appeal, and the Commonwealth need not bow down to New Hampshire’s policies.
Jason Gerhard, a state representative from Belmont, also filed an amicus brief for the case, alongside the Second Amendment Foundation, the National Rifle Association and a multitude of other gun rights and gun violence prevention groups. Court is set to reconvene Sept. 9.
This article is being shared by partners in The Granite State News Collaborative. For more information, visit collaborativenh.org.
