3-d_printed_gun_liberator

Four more states and a number of individuals have been added as defendants to a lawsuit originally against the federal government over its decision to renege on an agreement regarind the sharing of 3-D firearms printing technology.

WND reported last month the Second Amendment Foundation and Defense Distributed were pursuing a federal lawsuit against New Jersey and Los Angeles officials after they threatened a proposal to post online 3-D printer plans for guns.

The issue isn’t new. The Department of Justice and Defense Distributed already had settled a case in which the DOJ objected to the online sharing of 3-D firearms plans.

The settlement of that lawsuit would allow Defense Distributed to post its computer files online.

However, prior to the Aug. 1 effective date for the resolution, other governmental units launched their own lawsuits.

The new compliant, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas in Austin, names both the New Jersey attorney general and the Los Angeles city attorney, accusing them of unconstitutional prior restraint.

Now, SAF says it has amended its case to add more defendants.

The case now also names New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Pennsylvania Gov. Thomas Wolf, Delaware Attorney General Matthew Denn, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, along with original defendants, New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal and Los Angeles City Attorney Michael Feuer.

The complaint states the defendants “are so eager to abridge the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms that they are willing abridge the First Amendment as a means of doing so.”

“Under the color of state law, the defendants are denying us our civil and constitutional rights by waging a coordinated and politically fueled campaign to censor Defense Distributed,” said SAF founder Alan M. Gottlieb.

“What these public officials are attempting is an unconstitutional exercise of prior restraint,” he added. “They are trying to prevent Defense Distributed and its founder, Cody Wilson, from exercising free speech.”

“This has turned into a classic First Amendment case,” Gottlieb said. “Only because this case involves technical information on production of firearm components on a 3-D printer have these anti-rights officials acted to squelch it. We cannot allow this to happen.”

A Bloomberg editorial argued privately made guns without serial numbers already are available legally, but the process requires “significant expertise.”

“That means, the editorial board said, it’s not a public safety crisis.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.