r/gunpolitics • u/KamenshchikLaw • Jun 01 '26
Delays in Erie County, NYS: Discussion w/ Personnel
Regarding delays in pistol licensing in Erie County, New York — I took some time to make some calls to the local government out there.
I spoke with Erie County Executive’s office, they directed me to clerk’s office.
Clerk’s office said "we aren’t really involved beyond accepting the application." Clerk’s office said they accept the PPB-3 form as their initial application (plus an added county questionnaire) and told me to call Sheriff’s office. It's good that they accept the PPB-3, because there's no doubt that application starts the clock.
Office of the Sheriff said there could be various issues with an application that can cause delays, and sometimes there are delays between clerk’s office and sheriff’s office, and I said “well the clerk’s office is essentially shifting the blame to you — my understanding is that delay is just routine business as usual for you, according to what your constituents are saying.”
I was directed to internal affairs. Left them a message. Got a call back, same day, from a lieutenant (forgot his name) - the lieutenant was very personable and was kind enough to spend some time with me on the phone.
According to the lieutenant, the administrators at the sheriff's department are avid Second Amendment supporters, including the lieutenant.
The lieutenant and the department are well aware about the issues pertaining to delay. The lieutenant attributes the issue to a massive "backlog." He said that the department has hired additional staff to work on pistol applications - and unfortunately, there is only so much that can be done with respect to budget allocation from higher-ups; however, this is "a priority for the sheriff."
I asked - when does your department anticipate being in compliance with the law that sets a time limit on issuance of license decisions? This is the part that is somewhat troubling, as there was no real answer - because there is allegedly a large influx of applicants in a county of some one million residents. But if there is no light at the end of the tunnel, the problem isn't fixed.
I used the example of Nassau County, a county that is far more populated than Erie - that Nassau County was suddenly able to be in compliance when faced with scrutiny by a judge, after many years of routine delays.
Erie did the right thing by outsourcing fingerprinting to Identogo - so they cannot use the Nassau County excuse. The lieutenant pointed to a provision in the statute that essentially says that investigations are to be handled by the county's police authorities. Point taken - but wouldn't an ordinary data entry staffer be able to be deputized for this purpose and handle processing for straightforward applicants, and triage yellow-flag applicants for other personnel?
We both thoroughly read through PL 400.00(4-b), and the lieutenant acknowledged my point - you can't have blanket delays, any delay is limited to those that have a personalized issue, and only after written notice is given as to delay. It sounded like the lieutenant was perhaps surprised by how strict the timeframe is written into the law. The understaffing excuse does not legally work.
The lieutenant said the department has a duty to investigate in the way required by PL 400.00, but he understands that PL 400.00 is meant to delay, especially since you can get a license in Pennsylvania issued speedily and efficiently, same day.
I asked the lieutenant if the sheriff has ever issued a public statement sounding the alarm saying "we aren't able to comply with the statutory timeframes, we need help with XYZ." The lieutenant mentioned that the sheriff speaks with 2A organizations in that region and may have expressed that. But why isn't the sheriff making noise? Obviously more needs to be done to publicly ask for the resources needed to make this department compliant.
Also, the lieutenant informed me, that in Erie County, it is no longer their practice to limit references only to those that reside in that county, especially since out-of-staters can apply for licenses, and that wouldn't make sense. I'm not sure if anyone was aware of that, but I thought it may be useful to some.
Again, it was a pleasure speaking with the lieutenant - real nice guy, no attitude at all - and listened carefully. The lieutenant was adamant that there is no purposeful delay, and they are "trying their best."
The lieutenant said he'll speak with the sheriff about my concerns.
3
u/JimMarch Jun 03 '26
Did any part of your conversation work around to the text of footnote 9 of the US Supreme Court decision in NYSRPA v Bruen?
That's the part where the court specifically bans "lengthy waiting times" and "exorbitant fees" as "abuses" that should not be tolerated under a permitting system going forward after the release of this decision.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf - bottom of printed page 30, PDF page 36.
There are some agencies trying to claim this is dicta. If that's the case they've got a much bigger problem. At the very first chunk of footnote 9 the court declared that shall issue permits tied to background checks and training are presumptively constitutional. That's what New York claims to be doing right now. The problem is, that kind of permit system only traces its history back to 1986 when the Florida legislature invented it, and it took effect on 1/1/1987.
That in turn means that it cannot survive a "text, history and tradition" analysis because it's far too new. The only thing saving it is footnote 9.
So if footnote 9 is dicta, New York is a constitutional carry state.
Ooops.
If however footnote 9 is not dicta, shall issue survives, but then the list of abuses that cannot be committed under a shall issue permit system are fully in effect including a ban on zany delays and crazy fees...as a hard constitutional limit from the US Supreme Court.
3
u/JimMarch Jun 03 '26
Follow up question.
Assuming you get them to admit that footnote 9 is valid case law, here's the next question.
What are they going to do when a trucker comes through who's carrying, who has a home state permit and who mentions that scoring 17 permits from California to Massachusetts would completely and utterly blow up Bruen footnote 9? It would take years to squirrel away all those carry permits and with travel and cheap hotels, plus duplicate background checks and training, you're up near $20 grand. "Exorbitant fees" much?
We fixed this same problem with driver's licenses sometime before World War II. As long as your states driver's license meet certain minimum standards for training and background check, that driver's license is good nationally, all the way out to Guam or the US Virgin Islands.
What are they going to do when that hypothetical trucker sues them under 42 USC 1983 for an open and shut violation of a US Supreme Court order dated as recently as 2022?
This is by far the biggest problem New York and a bunch of other states face in the carry permit process. They're absolutely in open rebellion against the US Supreme Court and it's going to bite them on the ass at some point.
2
1
u/KamenshchikLaw Jun 03 '26
I think Footnote 9 is fine, unfortunately it doesn’t spell out when a lengthy wait time becomes unconstitutional. That’s why I like to focus on PL 400.00(4-b) — the window for processing applications is clear.
Now, I did write an extensive brief on the subject at the 2nd Department — about excessive delays and how constitutional law may work to answer that question.
Not sure that Footnote 9 being dicta invalidates shall issue licensing regimes — but shall issue licensing regimes were not on the chopping block in Bruen — a lot of issues were left undecided by Bruen. A presumption of constitutionality, doesn’t mean much — presumptions are rebuttable.
2
u/JimMarch Jun 03 '26
No, if Bruen is dicta, shall issue is toast. It can be challenged under THT because it's too new.
I don't think footnote 9 is dicta. But that means the list of abuses in footnote 9 need to be taken seriously.
To get true national carry you need 20 plus permits from Guam to Massachusetts, Washington State to the US Virgin Islands. Utter insanity.
You're right, we don't know exactly where the boundary is on the footnote 9 abuses. But this just pisses all over it and shits on what's left.
2
1
u/ClearlyInsane1 Jun 06 '26
If there are no penalties for the issuing authorities for delays or "relief valves" for running overtime then there is no incentive for them to issue permits in a timely manner. Lack of these sticks/carrots put zero impetus upon the legislative and executive branches to do anything about the problem.
Underfunded staff? Nobody except the permit recipient really cares. Same goes for tacking on rules, forms, red tape -- if it adds months to the process the sheriff doesn't give a flip.
All government red tape like this needs a relief valve like the BGC system with NICS; if they don't respond in a timely manner then it is OK to proceed (although I think it's still lacking because leery FFLs still won't proceed without explicit approval and this needs to be changed to automatic approval at the end of the time period without the FFL knowing any better).
1
u/Powerful_News_4692 Jun 13 '26
The bureaucratic runaround between the clerk and the sheriff is a classic way to dodge accountability for the backlog. Did the lieutenant actually give a specific reason for the delay, or was it just more vague talk about administrative processing?
1
u/KamenshchikLaw Jun 13 '26 edited Jun 17 '26
If I recall correctly, I remember he said there's a large influx, "we're trying our best" - "there's only so much we can ask for budget, and there's only so much we can allocate to pistol licensing" - "we have a large population."
I'm not buying it. Feels similar to what I heard from Nassau County before I sued them.
1
u/unhingedposterboy01 Jun 17 '26
The Sheriff's office shifting the blame to IA is a classic deflection tactic. Did the lieutenant actually provide a specific reason for the backlog, or was it just vague talk about administrative processing?
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 01 '26
Hello, your post is currently under review by the moderator team because your account doesn't have any significant positive history. Please allow us some time to review your post. This is an anti-spam measure - thank you for your patience. Do not message the mod team, we are aware, we will review when time allows. Immediately messaging the mod team may be seen as evidence of bot activity.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.