In Johnson v. New York State Dept. of Correctional Services, 2010 WL 1752550, *1+ (N.D.N.Y. Apr 30, 2010) (NO. 809-CV-965 DNH/RFT), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York heard and ruled in a case where retired corrections officers had brought a civil action against the New York State Department of Corrections seeking relief from the court under the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA) permitting retired police officers to carry concealed weapons.
The retired correctional officers in the Johnson case had sought to obtain necessary credentials under LEOSA from their former agency in order to comply with the law. They had prepared a number of written requests to this effect with their former agency. In response to the retired officers’ written requests, the New York Department of Corrections had denied the officers the credentials they had sought. The retired officers then brought suit against the agency.
In their lawsuit, the retired officers sought a number of findings from the U.S. District Court in their lawsuit. Most important to the correctional officers, however, was a request that the court order the Department of Corrections to provide the retired officers with the credentials that were necessary in order to comply with 18 U.S.C. § 926C(a) of LEOSA. Section 926C(a) of LEOSA requires retired law enforcement officers to photo identification in accord with 18 U.S.C. § 926C (d) from the agency from which they retired.
The U.S. District Court held that LEOSA established a federal right for retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed firearms across state lines, but also ruled that the lawsuit in this case had to be dismissed because the relief sought was unconstitutional. In particular, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York found that because Congress could not force state agencies to take action in issuing retired police officers credentials under LEOSA, that their case must be dismissed.
In sum, while this one U.S. District Court appeared to rule contrary to retired officers in the present case, it may not be an indication of what another U.S. District Court might hold. In addition, the Johnson case also would not apply on the constitutional issues involved, to federal law enforcement officers. An appeal in the case was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and is presently pending.
Comments