Bronze Supporter
- Messages
- 5,465
- Reactions
- 13,718
The problem with suing the state is that (at least the ACLDN letter linked above) is that the state used a generic law to shut them down. Despite the press releases about "murder insurance" the state isn't using that argument to shut ACLDN down.
The suit against the state here would have to argue that this insurance plan must be exempt from the generally-applicable laws because of some constitutional privilege. That argument usually fails. It would be stronger if the activity was closer to the core of the 2A (such as gun shops having a 2A right to stay open and sell guns during health emergencies). The suit would also have to wait until the administrative remedies and agency appeals process had been exhausted, or was unavailable.
The suit against the state here would have to argue that this insurance plan must be exempt from the generally-applicable laws because of some constitutional privilege. That argument usually fails. It would be stronger if the activity was closer to the core of the 2A (such as gun shops having a 2A right to stay open and sell guns during health emergencies). The suit would also have to wait until the administrative remedies and agency appeals process had been exhausted, or was unavailable.