704 F.Supp.3d 1206
D.N.M.2023Background
- Plaintiff James Springer challenged the New Mexico Department of Health’s Second Amended Public Health Order (SAPHO), which temporarily prohibits most individuals from carrying firearms in public parks and playgrounds in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County.
- The SAPHO exempts law enforcement, licensed security, active-duty military, Albuquerque Shooting Range Park, state parks, and certain state-owned lands; it is effective for the duration of the declared public-health emergency.
- Springer sought a preliminary injunction to enjoin the SAPHO to the extent it bars carrying firearms in parks and playgrounds; he asserted Second Amendment and First Amendment/Due Process claims.
- The court applied the Supreme Court’s Bruen framework: (1) whether the Second Amendment’s text covers the conduct, and (2) whether the restriction is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
- The court found Springer has standing to challenge the restriction as to public parks but not playgrounds, and preliminarily enjoined the SAPHO’s ban on carrying firearms in public parks in Albuquerque and Bernalillo County.
- The court declined to enjoin the playground restriction, reasoning playgrounds are analogous to historically recognized “sensitive places” (e.g., schools) where firearms may be restricted; Springer also lacked standing on playgrounds and on his First Amendment/Due Process claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to challenge parks | Springer intends to carry at parks for self-defense; credible threat of prosecution | City-level rules already ban firearms on some city property, so no redressable injury | Springer has standing for parks |
| Standing to challenge playgrounds | Springer challenged playground restriction generally | Springer never alleges intent to carry at playgrounds; no injury | No standing for playgrounds |
| Second Amendment — parks (merits) | SAPHO violates Bruen: no historical analogue banning firearms in parks | Pointed to late-19th/territorial park laws and secondary citations | Government failed its Bruen burden; Springer likely to succeed; injunction granted for parks |
| Second Amendment — playgrounds (merits / sensitive places) | Playground restriction is broader than historical sensitive-place rules | Playgrounds are analogous to schools; longstanding tradition of regulating firearms in sensitive places | Playgrounds are sensitive places; restriction upheld (no injunction) |
| First Amendment and Due Process claims | SAPHO excludes him from public forum and restricts expressive conduct (open-carry rally) | SAPHO does not bar his planned Civic Plaza rally; claims insufficiently developed | Plaintiff failed to show likelihood of success; claims denied |
Key Cases Cited
- New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022) (establishes Bruen two-step historical-analogy test for Second Amendment challenges)
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (recognizes individual right to possess firearms for self-defense and discusses sensitive-place exceptions)
- Free the Nipple–Fort Collins v. City of Fort Collins, 916 F.3d 792 (10th Cir. 2019) (discusses status-quo and heightened preliminary-injunction standard)
- Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (2016) (standing requires injury in fact, traceability, redressability)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing framework)
- Univ. of Tex. v. Camenisch, 451 U.S. 390 (1981) (purpose of preliminary injunction: preserve relative positions pending trial)
- Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418 (2006) (burdens at preliminary injunction stage track trial burdens)