On Monday, the Firearms Policy Coalition asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to toss a Texas judge's ruling that keeps big chunks of everyday life off limits to people who carry firearms for self-defense. FPC's appeal zeroes in on state laws that block carry in businesses where on-site alcohol sales provide 51 percent or more of revenue, at racetracks, and during certain sporting events. The filing asks the appeals court to strike those provisions as incompatible with the Second Amendment.
The 67-page opening brief was filed in New Orleans on June 15 and frames the challenge under the Supreme Court's text and history test. According to the opening brief, the appeal argues that Texas's "51%" rule and the racetrack and sporting-event bans treat ordinary public places as sensitive places without historical analogues. The brief identifies Bradley A. Benbrook, Stephen M. Duvernay, Jamie G. McWilliam and R. Brent Cooper as counsel for the appellants.
The appeal follows a March 24 opinion from U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman, who granted the state's motion for summary judgment and found the challenged statutes constitutional. As detailed in the district court opinion, the judge relied on historical analogies to uphold Texas's bans at racetracks, certain alcohol-dominant businesses, and many sporting events. That ruling set the stage for the plaintiffs to carry their arguments to the Fifth Circuit.
Who's pushing the appeal
The appellants are three Texas residents - Charles Ziegenfuss, David Montgomery, and Brian Robinson - joined by the national group Firearms Policy Coalition. In a press release via Firearms Policy Coalition, FPC President Brandon Combs said, "The Second Amendment cannot be redlined out of existence," describing the appeal as an effort to restore public-carry rights. The plaintiffs' filing asks for a declaration that Texas Penal Code § 46.03 and related provisions violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
Legal stakes
How the Fifth Circuit applies the Supreme Court's Bruen framework will determine whether modern sensitive-place rules can survive close historical scrutiny. Plaintiffs argue the Texas provisions lack relevant historical analogues, while the state persuaded Judge Pittman that the laws fit within a longstanding tradition of location-based regulation; both views are laid out in the briefs and the district opinion. For the Supreme Court's standard, see N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen.
What happens next
The appeal is docketed as No. 26-10302 in the Fifth Circuit, and the court's public docket shows the appellants' brief was filed June 15. According to the Fifth Circuit docket, the case will move forward under the court's briefing schedule before a panel of judges decides whether to set oral argument. If the court hears argument and issues a decision, it could produce a binding circuit-level ruling on how Bruen applies to location-based carry bans in Texas and potentially across the Fifth Circuit.
