Skip to comments.U.S. District Court Dismisses Lawsuit to Ban Traditional Ammunition
Posted on 05/23/2013 2:35:59 PM PDT by marktwain
NEWTOWN, Conn. -- The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia today dismissed a lawsuit brought by the radical anti-hunting Center for Biological Diversity and six other groups demanding the Environmental Protection Agency ban traditional ammunition containing lead components.
Traditional ammunition represents 95 percent of the U.S. market and is the staple ammunition for target shooters, hunters and law enforcement, with more than 10 billion rounds sold annually.
NSSF filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit last August. The court today agreed with NSSF that EPA does not have the authority to regulate traditional ammunition under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
EPA had already twice denied attempts by CBD to have the agency ban traditional ammunition, and the court had dismissed an earlier case brought by CBD seeking the same relief.
We are gratified that the court has found this second frivolous lawsuit, which is essentially the same as the one dismissed last year, was equally without merit, said Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry. This was a waste of taxpayers' dollars and EPA resources spent in having to defend a baseless lawsuit.
CBD's serial petitioning of EPA and its repeated lawsuits were designed to cripple the shooting sports in America by banning the ammunition that millions of hunters and target shooters choose to use safely and responsibly.
"There is quite simply no sound science that shows the use of traditional ammunition has harmed wildlife populations or that it presents a health risk to humans who consume game taken with such ammunition," said Keane. "Banning traditional ammunition would cost tens of thousands of jobs in America and destroy wildlife conservation that is funded in part by an 11 percent excise tax on the sale of ammunition. The protection and management of wildlife is properly handled by the professional biologists in the state fish and game agencies, as it has been for over a hundred years.
In addition to NSSF, the National Rifle Association, Safari Club International and the Association of Battery Recyclers intervened in the case.
Organizations that joined CBD in its lawsuit were the Cascades Raptor Center of Oregon, the Loon Lake Loon Association of Washington, Preserve Our Wildlife of Florida, Tennessee Ornithological Society, Trumpeter Swan Society and Western Nebraska Resources Council.
NSSF was represented by Roger Martella and Christopher Bell from Sidley Austin.
Learn more about traditional ammunition.
About NSSF The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 8,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen's organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.
“Losers’ Pay” would be a start...
“Losers Pay would be a start...”
Sounds great until you are the looser because of a corrupt judge.
Some left wing judges simply make up the law as they go and they also like to ignore facts and will make up their own facts.
The EPA has been trying for several years to have lead-based ammunition declared as an environmental hazard so that it can be regulated by federal law. Another lame, short-sighted attempt at disarming the public. And the educated fools in that bureaucracy don’t even realize that such legislation would also disarm the police and the military.
Heh. They threw away yet more debt/revenues needed by their socialist kind. Good. Have fun. Enjoy the slide toward bond collapse, repudiation, austerity measures, and finally, small government.
Actually, IIRC lead-based ammunition was specifically excluding from the act enabling the EPA, and EPA has, shockingly, informed tree huggers petitioning for regulation of this fact on more than one occasion.
Where do you get the idea you wouldn’t have to pay the first time?
How about Obamacare?
It went all the way to the Supreme Court.
One SC judge decides to take it upon himself to basically rewrite the law so it was nice and legal.
Let me hear you argue how the SC decision proves that challenging Obamacare was without merit.
Loon Lake Loon Association. How appropriate.
Very good point. I love your user name.
Looser pays sounds great, but only if the courts work the way they are supposed to, and they don't anymore.
City and County govts are pretty much free to do anything they want, and you can't stop them.
Look at the Kelo (SP?) decision where it's OK to take your property and give it to someone else.
I had a court decision against me where the court said in part, it was my responsibility to stop the County from committing fraud and taking my property. Once they have committed fraud and taken your property you can't do anything about it.
No explanation as to how you are supposed to know the County is committing fraud before your property is seized by the court, but once it's seized by the court it's too late to do anything about it.
They would shift to alternative materials. Banning lead ammo is a narrlowly-targeted legal attack aimed at reloaders.
BTW, ChiFi's husband, Richard Blum, is a big time investor in tungsten ammo with the metal sourced from China (long thread, but worth it).
The Kelo case, albeit an abomination against the Kelo family, was correctly decided pursuant to the Tenth Amendment (and for the record, I'm such a pro-property rights guy that I think zoning law is illegitimate). To hold that the Federal government should be the sole guarantor of property rights is effectively to accede all power over property to the Federal courts.
Pursuant to Kelo, many States then passed property rights protections superior to the Constitution. The States can then duke it out in the court of Natural Law to determine the best balance between collective v. individual control of property.
“The Kelo case, albeit an abomination against the Kelo family”
It was an abomination against all property owners in the country.
All of these groups have held large protests and filed many lawsuits concerning the massive numbers of protected birds being sliced apart by windmills. /s
No, it was an abomination against all property owners in the Connecticut. Other States have property laws superior to Constitutional protections.
In case you are interested, here is an article on the background principle of selective incorporation, specifically as regards Kelo.
P.O. Box 710
Tucson, AZ 85702-0710
tel: (520) 623.5252
toll-free: (866) 357.3349
fax: (520) 623.9797
P.O. Box 100599
Anchorage, AK 99510-0599
tel: (907) 274-1110
fax: (907) 258-6177
P.O. Box 1178
Flagstaff, AZ 86002-1178
351 California St., Ste. 600
San Francisco, CA 94104
tel: (415) 436.9682
fax: (415) 436.9683
PMB 447, 8033 Sunset Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90046-2401
tel: (323) 654.5943
fax: (323) 650.4620
P.O. Box 549
Joshua Tree, CA 92252-0549
P.O. Box 2155
St Petersburg, FL, 33731
P.O. Box 25686
Albuquerque, NM 87125
tel: (928) 853-9929
P.O. Box 421
Pomona, NY 10970
P.O. Box 11374
Portland, OR 97211-0374
tel: (503) 283.5474
fax: (503) 283.5528
P.O. Box 188
Richmond, VT 05477-0188
tel: (802) 434.2388
fax: (802) 329.2075
5100 Sherier Pl. NW
Washington, D.C. 20016
tel: (202) 536.9351