Sullivan v. Ferguson

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 GABRIELLA SULLIVAN et al., CASE NO. 3:22-cv-05403-DGE 11 Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 12 v. 13 BOB FERGUSON et al., 14 Defendants. 15

16 This matter comes before the Court on its own motion pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 706(a). 17 The Supreme Court in Bruen has directed “when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an 18 individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its 19 regulation . . . the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this 20 Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.” New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. 21 Bruen, 142 S. Ct. 2111, 2126 (2022). Courts, in turn, must “assess whether modern firearms 22 regulations are consistent with the Second Amendment’s text and historical understanding.” Id. 23 at 2131. 24 1 The parties are hereby ORDERED to show cause within 28 days of the issuance of this 2 order why the Court should not appoint its own expert witness to assist the Court in evaluating 3 historical sources in this matter to avoid “cherry-pick[ing]” the historical record. See United 4 States v. Bullock, No. 3:18-CR-165-CWR-FKB, 2022 WL 16649175, at *2 (S.D. Miss. Oct. 27,

5 2022) (noting that “[t]his Court is not a trained historian” and that there is a “serious disconnect 6 between the legal and historical communities” as to firearms history); see also Baird v. Bonta, 7 No. 2:19-CV-00617-KJM-AC, 2022 WL 17542432, at *9 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 8, 2022). 8 Dated this 9th day of January, 2023. 9 A 10 David G. Estudillo United States District Judge 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24