Judge blocks 3D-printer gun plans
Courts, Trump, Congress join in legal controversy stirred by published plans of Austin company.
A federal judge Tuesday temporarily blocked an Austin company from publishing blueprints for 3D-printed guns on its website, the latest twist in a fight that has sparked lawsuits, countersuits and threats of legal action as part of a heated national debate over the wisdom of promoting untraceable, difficult to detect firearms.
U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik of Seattle granted the request for a nationwide temporary restrain- ing order sought by eight Democratic state attorneys general who argued that the information posed a serious threat to national security and public safety.
are disappointed in this ruling, which will result in a global injunc tion on the freedom of speech,” said Josh Blackman, the lawyer for Defense Distributed and its founder, Cody Wilson of Austin.
The Seattle ruling followed a related hearing on the opposite coast, where New Jersey officials asked a state court to block release of plans to build firearms using 3D printers. Afterward, New Jersey’s Democratic attorney general claimed victory, saying Defense Distributed agreed to back away from Wednesday’s planned release of the blueprints for about a month.
But Blackman said Wilson and Defense Distributed gave away nothing in New Jersey because the gun-making plans already had been published Friday.
released early after our plans changed,” Blackman said. “We agreed (in court) to not publish any new files — we weren’t going to do so anyway.”
President Donald Trump raised the profile of the fight Tuesday
morning by tweeting that he was looking into the issue.
“Already spoke to NRA, doesn’t seem to make much sense!” Trump wrote.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer quickly responded, telling Trump that officials within his administration’s State Department had approved the release of the blueprints, adding: “What kind of incompetence and dangerous governing is this?”
‘Recipe for disaster’
The debate over printed guns, sometimes called ghost guns by opponents because they would be printed without serial numbers or the need for background checks, began in 2013 when Wilson announced that he had created the first working gun built with a 3D printer — a single-shot pistol he called the Liberator.
Wilson posted plans online, but the State Department intervened, warning that the publication violated the export provisions of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations because the plans could be downloaded worldwide.
Wilson took down the plans and sued the State Department, telling the American-Statesman at the time that he believed the government was improperly infringing on his free-speech right to disseminate information about something that is legal for most Americans to own: guns.
That lawsuit ended in late June when the State Department reversed course, entering a settlement letting Wilson and Defense Distributed — the company he founded in his Hyde Park apartment in 2012 — distribute plans for the Liberator and other weapons at the end of July. The company instead published the blueprints Friday, five days earlier than planned.
“The age of the downloadable gun formally begins,” Defense Distributed’s website proclaimed.
Law enforcement officials blanched, calling printable guns a boon to terrorists and criminals.
Democrats in Congress vowed to introduce legislation to outlaw what some called the ultimate gun loophole and urged Trump to block the State Department’s approval.
“Permitting unlimited access to undetectable guns offers a potential recipe for disaster,” said U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin. “These weapons could be carried into an airplane, a courthouse, a school or anywhere else without detection by screening devices.”
“The ball is in the president’s court,” said U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass. “Otherwise, Donald Trump will be responsible for every plastic gun on the streets of our country if he does not act.”
Austin Police Chief Brian Manley said weapons made on a 3D printer reduce gun safety, providing possible weapons for criminals who cannot legally obtain a firearm.
But gun rights advocates argued that fears were overblown because printed guns tend to break down quickly when fired, typically hold no more than one or two bullets, require expensive 3D printers to make and often need metal parts that can be detected.
NRA responds
Responding to Trump’s tweet, the National Rifle Association said that regardless of what is published on the internet, undetectable plastic guns remain illegal.
“Federal law passed in 1988, crafted with the NRA’s support, makes it unlawful to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer or receive an undetectable firearm,” said Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action.
NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch, who has called printable guns symbols of freedom and innovation, voiced doubts that a ban on the information would be enforceable. Plans for the Liberator, for example, were downloaded more than 100,000 times, and posted on other sites, before Defense Distributed removed the plans from its website in 2013.
Even so, opponents have turned to the courts to try to stop Defense Distributed:
■ On Friday, a federal judge in Austin rejected an emergency motion by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Everytown for Gun Safety and the Giffords Law Center to block publication of the plans. Additional action on that lawsuit is not likely.
■ In addition to seeking an injunction, the lawsuit in Seattle federal court targeted the Trump administration in hopes of blocking the State Department settlement.
■ Officials in Pennsylvania and New Jersey also sued Defense Distributed in state courts. During an emergency hearing in Pennsylvania, the Austin company agreed Sunday to temporarily block Pennsylvania internet users from downloading the plans.
Separately, Defense Distributed also agreed to block internet users in New Jersey and Los Angeles, where City Attorney Michael Feuer threatened legal action.
But the Austin company struck back Sunday, suing Feuer and New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal, saying they “threatened and intend to drag Defense Distributed before all manner of far-flung criminal and civil tribunals in an effort to silence the organization.”
Filed in Austin federal court, the lawsuit was joined by the Second Amendment Foundation and seeks a ruling declaring that legal action by New Jersey and Los Angeles would violate constitutional protections for free speech and the right to bear arms.