Wilmington public housing gun case could have national impact

WILMINGTON -- A federal judge is deciding what restrictions can be imposed on gun owners in Wilmington public housing by government officials and attorneys, and legal observers say the case could help frame the national debate on how gun regulation is handled in public housing.The Wilmington case has attracted the attention of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the matter.
On Friday, Wilmington Housing Authority attorney Barry M. Willoughby told U.S. District Judge Leonard P. Stark the case is one of first impression in Delaware and is being watched nationally. "The ramifications go beyond Wilmington," he said.
Attorney Francis X. Pileggi -- who is representing two WHA residents in a lawsuit backed by the National Rifle Association -- agreed with Willoughby on that one point.
"I can tell you, because I go to national conferences on Second Amendment law, they have talked about this case. Many people across the country are closely watching," he said.
Daniel Vice, senior attorney at the Brady Center, said the litigation is part of a national effort by the NRA "to push more guns into more places," which the center opposes on safety grounds.
The lawsuit was filed in Delaware Chancery Court in May 2010 -- and later moved to federal court -- over the WHA's then ban on gun ownership by tenants.
Following a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court several months after the suit was filed -- which was widely interpreted as establishing the constitutional right of tenants in public housing to own a firearm -- the WHA dropped its ban and instead adopted rules that restricted guns in the common areas of public housing, like the laundry room or television lounge.
The plaintiffs -- Charles Boone and a woman identified only as "Jane Doe" -- did not drop their suit and instead charged that the restriction on guns in the common areas -- along with a second rule that requires residents to show they have a concealed carry permit when asked by housing officials -- are unconstitutional.
In court Friday, Pileggi asked Stark to rule that the WHA's former ban on residents having guns was unconstitutional. Pileggi charged that without a ruling from the court the WHA could change its policy back at any time.Willoughby said the restrictions on gun ownership in public housing were limited, reasonable and necessary to maintain safety.
Willoughby argued that to allow weapons in public areas would create undue alarm and could lead to accidental shootings. He said that just as there are restrictions on the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of expression -- like pornography -- limits also can be placed on having a gun.
Several people interviewed at WHA's Compton Towers Friday strongly supported the restrictions in public areas. "I think it's silly. They don't need a gun in the rec room," said resident Anthony Williams.
"It's a good thing [banning guns from the public areas]," said resident Ricardo Rivera. "Children just shouldn't be seeing guns around. I try to stay away from that. It's a threat."
Jada Battle said she wouldn't mind if the WHA brought back its ban on guns. "I don't think there should be any," she said. "I mean, my daughter can get into things in my room. We've got old people here that don't have it all. We've got kids that don't have it all. We've got adults that don't have it all. Half the people here don't have it all. Having guns around wouldn't help."
Widener University associate professor Wesley M. Oliver, a specialist in constitutional law, said the WHA makes a reasonable argument and the law recognizes that guns can be restricted in some places like a courthouse or playground.
"But the question is, who gets to make those decisions?" he said. "State legislatures? An administrative agency? The federal government? Or does the court get to define those special types of exemptions?"
Oliver said it certainly would seem like the WHA would have grounds to limit guns in the common areas of public housing units, like the TV lounge.
He said children could be playing there and a display of a weapon could cause alarm. He said no one would want the situation where "the guy with the gun gets to pick the channels."
"It just seems like it is an invitation to escalate any conflict that might exist," he said.
Professor Laurie Levenson at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles said this case could take on national importance because in the wake of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions on Second Amendment rights, everyone is looking for guidance on the limits of gun ownership.
Levenson said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that some limitations are allowable, "we just don't know which ones or how much."
She said there is nothing in the recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that established an absolute right to carry guns anywhere at any time. "The question is are they limiting it in the bedroom or in the laundry room? Those details make a difference," she said.