search
top

Atlanta Airport Injunction Denied

A federal judge has denied a preliminary injunction in the case of GeorgiaCarry.org and Atlanta-Hartfield International Airport.  This doesn’t mean they lost the case, just that the judge doesn’t view that they are substantially likely to win.  I see a few problems with this line of reasoning.

  1. One is that the TSA doesn’t currently prohibit guns in the non-sterile area of the airports
  2. Two, the TSA doesn’t appear to have any unilateral authority to do so.
  3. Three, there’s no law in Georgia making carrying a firearm in an airport a crime.

So I tend to think they have a strong likelihood of winning their case, but this goes to show how hazardous it is to depend on the federal courts for enforcement of gun rights.

UPDATE: The federal judge in question is a notoriously liberal Carter appointee.  So take that for what it’s worth.

9 Responses to “Atlanta Airport Injunction Denied”

  1. Robb Allen says:

    I’m in agreement with you, here. However, I’ve got a zillion judges up for reelection next week, and I’ve just realized I haven’t the faintest idea who any of them are.

    I need to start compiling data on these people so I can vote their asses out of office if they tried to pull some crap like this. I get voting records of my local politicians emailed to me, I should figure out a way to keep tabs on the judicial line as well.

    Any ideas?

  2. Sebastian says:

    Well, in this case it’s a federal judge. But for local races, it’s often hard to get good information. I agree, it’s a problem. Plus, judges tend not to want to run on issues. It’s mostly “I’m a good person. Just look at my family. I’m fair, but tough. Surely you want me to be your judge.”

  3. Robb Allen says:

    Yeah, but I want to see what they do while in court to see if they deserve to keep the job.

    But that’s a metric shit-load of data. There’s no way I could go through each case to see if I felt they were judging correctly.

    Because if you don’t kick ’em out soon enough, they turn into federal judges without a clue.

  4. ATL says:

    If Atlanta wins this case it will get overturned in appeal. There will be some hell to pay on the state level too with Georgia if they lose. Atlanta must be run by abject idiots, I swear! See what happens when Yankees defect from more “progressive” states. UGH!

  5. Carl in Chicago says:

    This is what gets me …

    Shoob said: “Here, the evidence demonstrates, at the very least, that there is a significant question as to whether permitting the carrying of guns in the airport is a serious threat to the public safety and welfare.”

    Evidence? Significant question? What about the evidence from the 40 shall-issue states, that demonstrates the public is either safer or that the status of their safety remains unchanged given liberalized Right-to-Carry law?

    ATL says: “See what happens when Yankees defect from more “progressive” states. UGH!”

    I’m a yankee, boy. I am not proud of it, necessarily, but I am nonetheless. And I certainly support lawful carry in airports and elsewhere. Any room in your stereotypical thinking for that?

  6. Ted In Bed says:

    Bummer …. I was so hopeful. Jimmy Carter’s legacy continues UGH!

    If anyone is interested, the pleading for the case are at:

    http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/category/action-items/hartsfield-airports-firearm-ban/

    The last filing from GCO is one of the better filings

    I suppose we waited 30 years for this to change, another year is bearable. Certainly, our Legislature is watching and probably not pleased at Atlanta’s actions.

  7. Xrlq says:

    Shoob does sound like a real shoob. However, the ruling isn’t necessarily wrong, as showing a likeihood of prevailing on the merits is not the only criterion that needs to be met. Another is irreparable injury, which strikes me as a long shot.

  8. Carl in Chicago says:

    “I suppose we waited 30 years for this to change, another year is bearable. Certainly, our Legislature is watching and probably not pleased at Atlanta’s actions.”

    Ted, I think you hit the nail on the head…particularly the part about the GA legislature.

  9. Texas Mike says:

    The TSA is apparently voicing support of the ban, so I suggest a letter writing campaign. They have a comments/complaints form on their website.

    Such a ban would be impossible to enforce, and holds no merit based on history. Are they going to search cars coming on airport premises? Are they going to try to pass a law that says all cars are subject to search? Since they have no right to search your car without probable cause, this law would be toothless. An unenforcable law is an unneccessary and stupid law.

    As an aside, the DFW airport’s main artery road is used daily by commuters.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SnarkyBytes » Atlanta Airport - Request for preliminary injunction rejected - [...] UPDATE: Sebastian has more. [...]
top