PA Attorney General Dave Sunday – Constitutional Traitor or Oath-keeper? – Prince Law Offices Blog

It’s troublesome to go on Fb or any web firearm discussion board with out seeing all of the unfavourable feedback concerning the selections being made by newly-elected Lawyer Normal David Sunday. However are these feedback justified? As an legal professional on the opposite aspect of the isle in a number of instances the place Lawyer Normal Sunday’s Workplace is representing the Pennsylvania State Police Commissioner, I feel I’ve a singular perspective that the majority will discover extraordinarily useful in reaching their very own conclusions.

First, I wish to begin with a duly enacted regulation that few know of, no less than till it’s their aspect of the political-isle that isn’t being represented – the Commonwealth Attorneys Act. You most likely keep in mind the outrage when then-AG Kathleen Kane refused to defend the constitutionality of PA’s ban on same-sex marriages or when then-AG Josh Shapiro refused to defend the constitutionality of PA’s ban on Medicaid-funded abortions. And these are simply two examples of the handfuls, the place Pennsylvania’s legal professional generals have shirked their statutory obligations and violated their oaths of workplace, below the Commonwealth Attorneys Act.

Particularly, 71 P.S. § 732-204(a)(3)(emphasis added) supplies:

It shall be the responsibility of the Lawyer Normal to uphold and defend the constitutionality of all statutes in order to forestall their suspension or abrogation within the absence of a controlling resolution by a courtroom of competent jurisdiction.

As you may see, there aren’t exceptions to rule that in case your political beliefs are opposite to the protection of a selected statute that your responsibility is abrogated. The rule is absolute, no less than till “a controlling resolution by a courtroom of competent jurisdiction” guidelines the regulation unconstitutional. At that time, though there aren’t any instances decoding this language, it appears clear to me that the legal professional normal will get to determine whether or not he/she’s going to proceed to defend the constitutionality of the regulation or step apart. That is supported by the truth that the Normal Meeting solely required it till a call by “a” — singular — courtroom of competent jurisdiction and buttressed by the truth that it doesn’t use language corresponding to “the best courtroom of competent jurisdiction” or “Pennsylvania or US Supreme Court docket.”

Resultantly, an legal professional normal’s responsibility to defend the constitutionality of a regulation may finish in quite a few methods or factors throughout litigation. For instance, if a preliminary or everlasting injunction is issued towards the regulation in query over its constitutionality, the legal professional normal’s obligated responsibility would finish. Conversely, even when the trial courtroom discovered the regulation to be constitutional, however a the mid-level appellate courtroom discovered it to be unconstitutional, the statutory responsibility would stop; leaving it as much as the legal professional normal to determine whether or not his/her workplace would proceed to defend the regulation’s constitutionality.

Turning to the instances the place I’m on the opposite aspect of the isle, difficult the constitutionality of quite a few provisions of the Uniform Firearms Act as they relate to 18-20 yr olds and those that are in any other case precluded from acquiring a license to hold firearms, the preliminary trial courtroom selections both resulted in a loss or the choice was stayed pending enchantment. Primarily based on § 732-204(a)(3), Lawyer Normal Sunday was required to proceed defending the constitutionality of the legal guidelines earlier than the Third Circuit Court docket of Appeals, as a result of we didn’t have a controlling resolution by a courtroom, discovering that the regulation was unconstitutional. Nonetheless, that did lately change, when the Third Circuit dominated in my case – Lara, et al. v. PSP Commissioner, No. 21-1832 – that Pennsylvania regulation unconstitutionally bans 18-to-20-year-olds from carrying firearms exterior their properties throughout a state of emergency (18 Pa.C.S. § 6107). And that ruling got here down earlier than AG Sunday was sworn-in.

As soon as sworn-in (which doesn’t lead to him realizing about any of the 1000’s of pending instances in his Workplace and I don’t consider he knew something, at that time, concerning the Lara case), whereas there was a ruling by a courtroom of competent jurisdiction that the regulation is unconstitutional, a brand new dilemma arose – his moral obligations, as a result of the time to file an enchantment to the U.S. Supreme Court docket was ticking and he’s ethically required to guard the pursuits of his shopper – e.g. present enough time to acquire new counsel – if we assume that he is not going to be defending the Commissioner earlier than the U.S. Supreme Court docket. And he honored that moral obligation by merely acquiring an extension of time – till June 26, 2024 – for the PSP Commissioner to determine whether or not to enchantment and in that case, to acquire new counsel.

After all, this assumes that Lawyer Normal Sunday agrees that he’s not statutorily obligated to enchantment this matter additional and believes the regulation to be unconstitutional. And we’ll all know extra on June twenty sixth because it pertains to the Lara case… And whereas I’ve different instances at present pending along with his Workplace, in each instances, though the district courtroom discovered a number of provisions of the Uniform Firearms Act to be unconstitutional, it stayed its resolution pending enchantment, which, sadly, appear to have stagnated earlier than the Third Circuit (maybe because of the probably non-final nature of the choice in Lara, if the PSP Commissioner have been to enchantment).

Thus, as of this level, I’ve not discovered AG Sunday to have executed something inconsistent along with his statutory and moral obligations. In actual fact, this can be very refreshing to see Pennsylvania have an Lawyer Normal that truly follows the regulation, his oath, and ethics. And this, for my part, says every part concerning the character of Lawyer Normal Sunday.

Nonetheless, for some, that also isn’t sufficient, as a result of Lawyer Genegeral Sunday isn’t one who broadcasts each motion he takes. Fox instance, he has clawed again litigation relating to public funds for abortion, in addition to, undated mail in ballots. However you gained’t discover that on the AG Sunday’s web site or in any press releases…

Additional, just a bit over per week in the past, he entered into a brand new reciprocity settlement with Virginia. Whereas there was a press launch and the reciprocity map was up to date, the information of it wasn’t broadcasted throughout social media and information companies by the Lawyer Normal’s Workplace. And I consider, in the event you take the time to have a look at all of the press releases which were issued, you’ll be impressed by what all Lawyer Normal Sunday has completed since being sworn-in.

So, earlier than you contend that Lawyer Normal Sunday is constitutional traitor, spend a while contemplating whether or not he’s, refreshingly, really a constitutional oath-keeper.

Revealed by Joshua Prince, Esq.

With our 2nd Modification rights being attacked at each the Federal and State degree, and the ATF (Burea of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) attempting to shut down FFLs (Federal Firearms Licensees) for minor infractions whereas making FFLs the scapegoat when the ATF’s data are inaccurate, I wish to take this chance to introduce myself. I’m one among solely a handful of attorneys throughout the US that practices within the area of interest space of regulation often known as firearms regulation. I made a decision to pay attention my authorized apply on firearms regulation not solely as a result of I’m a shooter and firearms fanatic, but additionally to make sure that our inalienable Proper to Hold and Bear Arms isn’t encroached upon.

I deal with instances on the Federal and State degree for each FFLs and people. On the federal and state ranges for people, I actively defend the 2nd Modification of the US Structure and Part 21 of the PA Structure, in addition to, assist people with:

– License to Carry Firearms Denials;
– Challenges to Inaccurate PICS Denials;
– Reduction from Firearms Disabilities;
– Property Planning Recommendation;
– Gun/NFA Trusts; and
– 42 USC 1983 Actions for Deprivation of Civil Rights

At each the state and federal ranges, I characterize FFLs and SOTs all through Pennsylvania and the US relating to:

– ATF Compliance Inspections;
– Warning Letters and Hearings;
– FFL Revocations;
– Company Construction Recommendation
– Indoor/Out of doors Vary Implementation; and
– Forfeiture Proceedings

In following my love for firearms and firearms regulation, I’ve taught a number of Persevering with Authorized Schooling (CLE) seminars on Firearms in Estates and Trusts and Firearms Legislation 101 for a number of Bar Associations, together with Berks, Cumberland, and Dauphin Counties. I additionally deliberate and taught a number of Firearms in Estates CLE lessons for the Pennsylvania Bar Institute (PBI).

Whereas at Widener Legislation Faculty, I used to be a member of the Widener Legislation Journal. I wrote an article on the Inaccuracy of the Nationwide Firearms Registration and Switch Report (NFRTR). I additionally had an article revealed on Charge Disputes in Employees Compensation instances within the Widener Legislation Journal, Quantity 18, No. 2.

You may usually discover me posting on a number of web boards, together with Subguns, Uzitalk, AR15, and PAFOA. I additionally maintain PA Firearms Legislation lessons for native ranges to tell the general public on the firearm legal guidelines of the Commonwealth.

Following in my father’s footsteps, I’m additionally a Board member for the Pottstown Police Athletic League (PAL).
View all posts by Joshua Prince, Esq.