Cooke v. Hickenlooper, No. 13-cv-01300-MSK-MJW, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168806 (D. Colo. Nov. 27, 2013)

(county sheriffs and others filed an action against the State of Colorado, asking the court to declare that two new gun statutes were unconstitutional; at issue in this opinion was the court’s jurisdiction to hear the claims that C.R.S. §§18-12-301, 302, which would restrict the sale and possession of large capacity ammunition magazines, were “unconstitutionally vague”; the court ruled that at least one plaintiff had standing to assert a claim that the phrase “continuous possession” was unconstitutionally vague, but no plaintiff had alleged a credible threat of prosecution based upon the transfer of a magazine “designed to be readily converted to” accept more than 15 rounds; the court dismissed all claims asserted by the county sheriffs in their official capacities, finding that they lacked standing to assert the claims since they were not asserting an injury to their “individual interests”). 

CALT does not provide legal advice. Any information provided on this website is not intended to be a substitute for legal services from a competent professional. CALT's work is supported by fee-based seminars and generous private gifts. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in the material contained on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Iowa State University.

RSS​ Facebook Twitter