PARTIES AGREE TO ENFORCEMENT STAY OF WARRANTLESS RETAILER SEARCHES

BELLEVUE, WA – One week after the Second Amendment Foundation challenged Pennsylvania’s promulgated firearms regulation and its enforcement by the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) and Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, the sheriff has agreed to a court ordered stay enforcement of his policy of inspecting gun shops without a warrant.

The action is known as Schmidt, et al. v. Paris, et al. Joining SAF are Shot Tec, LLC and a private citizen, Grant Schmidt. They are represented by attorneys Joshua Prince and Dillon Harris, Civil Rights Defense Firm, of Bechtelsville, Pa. Defendants are Col. Christopher Paris, commissioner of the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) and Montgomery County Sheriff Sean Kilkenny, in their official capacities. The action was filed in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.

In a stipulation of the parties filed Friday, Montgomery County Sheriff Sean Kilkenny will stay enforcement of the search policy, but noted he “intends to respond in opposition to the Petition for Review, and this Stipulation shall not be interpreted as a waiver or limitation on the Sheriff’s ability to oppose and raise his defenses to the substance of the Petition.” Commissioner Paris has no objection.

“We’re delighted that Sheriff Kilkenny has agreed to pull back from enforcing his policy of conducting warrantless searches of licensees,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Respect for constitutional rights is paramount. The Sheriff’s policy raised constitutional concerns that we had outlined in our petition. While this case may take a while to litigate, during the process, licensees won’t need to worry about the Sheriff’s department violating their constitutional rights through the enforcement of the Sheriff’s policy.”

“It is important that this challenge make its way through the court in a timely fashion,” added SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “but in the process, no actions should be taken which remotely suggest this policy is okay and will ultimately prevail. A warrantless search violates the Fourth Amendment, and that is never okay.”