FOLLOWING a stipulation for voluntary dismissal from the parties, the District Court for the NMI has dismissed without prejudice the lawsuit of Army veteran Paul Murphy regarding the local ban on gun silencers. “Without prejudice” means it can be re-filed.
Chief Judge Ramona V. Manglona, in an order on Friday, directed the clerk to close the case. She also vacated the hearing scheduled for Oct. 31.
In his lawsuit, Murphy requested the federal court to grant his motion for summary judgement against the CNMI ban on gun silencers, which he said violates the 2nd and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
Murphy, filing pro se or representing himself, asked the court for a declaratory judgment that the ban on suppressors is unconstitutional.
He likewise requested the court to issue a permanent injunction enjoining the Department of Public Safety from enforcing the ban on silencers, sound suppressors or sound moderators.
Murphy stated that on Aug. 9, 2023, then-DPS Commissioner Clement R. Bermudes denied his request for firearm possession of a Maxim Defense POX-SD pistol chambered in 5.56 NATO with a built-in “soup can” suppressor.
On June 24, 2024, Bermudes’ successor, DPS Commissioner Macaranas, denied Murphy’s request for possession of a Banish 30 suppressor and a Ruger MKIV-SD Integral Suppressor .22-caliber pistol.
Murphy named Macaranas, in his official capacity, as defendant.
The CNMI government, through Chief Solicitor J. Robert Glass Jr., asked the court to dismiss Murphy’s lawsuit.
“The statute being challenged by Plaintiff was repealed by the Legislature in Public Law 19-73 § 3 in 2016,” Glass said. “The specific statute being challenged, 6 CMC § 2222(a), no longer exists. Thus, this court should dismiss any claim relating to 6 CMC § 2222(a) with prejudice because, even if plaintiff were correct and the ban on sound suppressors, moderators, and silencers is unconstitutional, it could not grant the relief requested in declaring a repealed statute unconstitutional.”
After Glass made the motion to dismiss, Murphy on Sept. 25 filed a motion to withdraw his complaint and motion for summary judgment. Murphy and the CNMI government then filed a stipulation of voluntary dismissal.
“On Sept. 26, 2024, the parties met and conferred via email regarding the Motion to Withdraw and to seek clarification of whether Plaintiff was seeking dismissal. Plaintiff clarified that he was seeking to dismiss the action in his Motion to Withdraw,” the stipulation stated.
In 2016, Murphy won his lawsuit against DPS, which he sued to stop the enforcement of the Commonwealth Weapons Act and the Special Act for Firearms and Enforcement or SAFE.
In 2020, Murphy filed another complaint against DPS for enforcing gun law provisions found unconstitutional.
In his recent complaint, he based his lawsuit on 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivation of civil rights under color of law and is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in challenging the CNMI’s Weapons Control Act and the CNMI’s SAFE Act.
Under 6 CMC § 2222(a), “It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive a firearm silencer, except as authorized by law.”
Under CNMI P.L. 19-42 § 208(a)(2), “No person shall possess: A silencer, sound suppressor or sound moderator.”
Murphy said that, pursuant to the Covenant to establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in political union with the United States of America, the Second Amendment and the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution are applicable to the CNMI.