Justices hear sides in challenge of courthouse gun ban

LITTLE ROCK — A Little Rock attorney denied entry three years ago into the Pulaski County District Courthouse in Little Rock while carrying a weapon took his case to the state Supreme Court on Thursday seeking the right for him and other attorneys to legally carry firearms into courthouses around the state as “officers of the court.”

Conway attorney Chris Corbitt, 52, filed a lawsuit against Pulaski County after being turned away from the district courthouse in early January 2020. Corbitt filed the lawsuit naming Barry Hyde, county judge of Pulaski County, and Sheriff Eric Higgins about a week after he was barred from entering the court building on West Roosevelt Road with his gun by a sheriff’s deputy.

According to Corbitt’s complaint filed Jan. 9, 2020, the attorney was stopped while trying to enter the courthouse adjacent to the jail in order to file paperwork with the clerk. A concealed-carry licensee with an “enhanced” permit, Corbitt said he usually stores his weapon in his car when going to court but forgot he had it Jan. 3 as he walked into the courthouse.

According to his complaint, Corbitt asked a security guard if he could take the gun into the building and was told he could not. Corbitt then said he tried to leave to take his gun back to the car but was told to wait for a detective from the Sheriff’s Office. Corbitt was eventually allowed to return to his car, he said, after he showed the officers portions of Arkansas Code Annotated 5-23-122, which contains the language about “officers of the court.” He was not, however, allowed to take a firearm into court with him.

Corbitt’s suit states that Act 1087 of 2017 — which amended Arkansas Code Annotated § 5-73-122 — modified the law to allow attorneys to have their handguns with them in any courtroom. The law does not specifically say attorneys can have guns but was modified to add “officer of the court” among in- court weapon- holders, to which Corbitt said attorneys have been recognized as officers of the court by the Arkansas Rules of Professional Conduct and the U.S. Supreme Court. In January 2022, Circuit Judge Herb Wright rejected Corbitt’s arguments, saying that that if the law was interpreted according to his interpretation, “it would lead to a nonsensical result.” Reading the law Corbitt’s way would strip the presiding judge of the authority to regulate who can enter the courtroom, Wright said in his ruling, which he said would violate the state constitution’s separation of powers clause by giving the state Legislature that authority instead.

Arguing Corbitt’s case before the high court justices was Robert Steinbuch, a Little Rock attorney who also teaches at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock Bowen Law School, and who represents Corbitt on all of his current lawsuits against public entities on concealed carry issues.

“This case is about gun rights,” Steinbuch declared at the outset of the hearing. “A denial in this case will be about gun rights, whatever the process that gets us there.”

Steinbuch also argued that Hyde and Higgins had mischaracterized the lawsuit as being about the right to bring guns into the courtroom. He said the lawsuit being argued only addressed courthouses.

“I suspect we’ll have a case about courtrooms, but this is not the one,” he said. “My client never made it past the courthouse doors.”

Justice Courtney Hudson asked Steinbuch what result he was seeking on his motion for declaratory judgment.

“We want the court to say that my client — and similarly situated individuals, incidentally — have the right to enter the courthouse with a gun because he is an officer of the court,” Steinbuch replied.

Hudson then asked why Steinbuch had filed a second motion for a writ of mandamus in an effort to have the courts compel Hyde and Higgins to allow lawyers to carry firearms into the courthouse as a “clear right” afforded “officers of the court.”

“The substance to grant a declaratory judgment with a clear right is the same substance that is needed to bring a writ of mandamus,” Steinbuch responded. “I brought them both. I do belt and suspenders. If you think one’s no good but I brought the other, I should be fine.

“I’m not saying you should grant me both,” Steinbuch continued. “Just grant me one.”

Frank LaPorte- Jenner, representing Pulaski County, said any interpretation of the statute would have to be in line with the state constitution. He also said that, prior to Thursday’s hearing, he had believed the issue was guns in the courtrooms themselves rather than the courthouse. Reading the statute in question, he said the authorization contained in the law provides authorization for who may possess guns in the courtroom.

“As far as courthouses go, this provision in the statute that we have discussed so thoroughly doesn’t speak to courthouses,” LaPorte-Jenner said. “It simply speaks to courtrooms.”

He said as the law is written, four categories of people — law enforcement officers on or off duty, officers of the court, bailiffs or persons authorized by the court — may bring firearms into a courtroom. But, LaPorte- Jenner argued, rather than the last category being the only category of those requiring authorization by the court, all four categories should be considered to be by authorization of the court.

“That is what prevents a conflict with the Arkansas Constitution,” he said. “Arkansas follows a strict separation of powers doctrine so the judicial branch is the branch of government that has control over the courtrooms of this state.”

LaPorte- Jenner argued that Corbitt and Steinbuch’s interpretation would usurp that power by putting the authority into the hands of the state Legislature to decide who may or may not bring guns into a courtroom, “regardless of the presiding judge’s wishes.”

He said both sides had agreed that firearms in the courtroom is a security matter, then questioned who should control court security, “the legislative branch or the judicial branch?”

“We point to the separation of powers and Amendment 80 to the state constitution which gives superintendent control over the courts to the judicial branch,” he said.

LaPorte- Jenner also argued that the term, “officer of the court,” could become so broad as to be virtually unenforceable if it hasn’t already. He pointed out that, in addition to attorneys, some states have interpreted officers of the court to include process servers, court reporters, expert witnesses and others.

“Under this broad interpretation,” he said, “that would mean that any attorney from anywhere in the United States, or any process server from anywhere gets to come into any Arkansas courtroom with a handgun, with or without the permission of the presiding judge.”

“That’s only officers of this court,” Steinbuch clarified, saying other states’ interpretations would not be considered.

Justice Rhonda Wood, seeking clarification of Steinbuch’s and Corbitt’s position, asked if a declaration that attorneys are officers of the court would permit the carrying of firearms would be limited to courthouses alone and not into courtrooms.

“We’re not asking for that here,” Steinbuch said.

Corbitt currently has lawsuits filed against Saline County after being denied entry to the county courthouse while armed; against Arkansas State University over being denied admission with a gun to First National Bank Arena; against the city of Little Rock for being denied admission to City Hall while carrying a gun; and another lawsuit against Pulaski County naming Hyde and Higgins as well as Circuit Judge Tim Fox after he was denied entry to the Pulaski County Circuit Courthouse.

In addition to the lawsuit regarding the Pulaski County Circuit Court facility that he is appealing to the Supreme Court, Corbitt is also appealing an adverse ruling in a lawsuit he brought against the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission after he was denied entry to a shooting range.