The U.S. Department of Justice has taken a significant step, as the rising 2A star Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon has filed an affirmative lawsuit to support gun owners, stating. In a press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, the Civil Rights Division announced a suit against the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD), alleging a “pattern and practice” of infringing Second Amendment rights by slow-walking concealed carry (CCW) permits.
Acting U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli framed the stakes bluntly, saying citizens in high-crime areas “cannot afford to wait” while the county dithers. Harmeet K. Dhillon added that “the Second Amendment is not a second-class right.” Those are big words – and, on paper, an even bigger pivot in federal posture toward gun rights.
What DOJ Says It Found Inside LASD
According to that DOJ press release, the Civil Rights Division launched its investigation on March 27, 2025, after receiving a flood of complaints about CCW delays. After reviewing data and documents tied to more than 8,000 permits, the government concluded that LASD approvals had ground to a near standstill, with interviews set as far as two years out. The complaint, filed in federal court in Los Angeles, seeks relief on behalf of “law-abiding applicants” whom the Department says were effectively denied by delay.
The Numbers Are Jaw-Dropping
Fox News reporter Michael Dorgan dug into the figures and surfaced a statistic that’s hard to ignore: between January 2024 and March 2025, LASD received 3,982 new carry applications and, as of May 8, approved only two. Two denials, 1,210 withdrawals, and about 2,768 still pending rounded out the tally he cites. Dorgan also notes that California law requires a response within 90 days, yet some applicants had interviews scheduled into late 2026. He further points out that a separate lawsuit led by the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) and allied groups already produced a partial injunction forcing shorter wait times and opening a path for non-residents – a crucial backdrop to this federal action.
How Commentators on the Right Are Reading It
William at Copper Jacket TV describes the suit as the direct outgrowth of the DOJ’s months-long probe, calling the delays “absolutely astonishing.” He highlights allegations that applicants waited an average of 281 days just to begin processing, with some stretching to 1,030 days – nearly three years. His broader critique is structural: when a “right” depends on a county’s permission slip, bureaucracy can morph it into a privilege. Whether you agree or not, his point lands here because time – as the facts suggest – has become the gatekeeper.
“A Right Delayed Is a Right Denied”
Jared Yanis at Guns & Gadgets frames the DOJ’s complaint in the language most gun owners know viscerally: Bruen recognized carry outside the home; stalls and sandbags are just bans by another name. He emphasizes the 0.05% approval rate (two out of nearly 4,000) and the median delay pushing past a year. Jared also details what DOJ is asking the court to do: declare the delays unconstitutional, permanently bar LASD from obstructive practices, and force compliance with both Bruen and California’s 90-day clock. He’s skeptical the federal government has turned pro-2A writ large – but sees this as an overdue check on local end-runs around Supreme Court doctrine.
The Legal Backbone: Pattern-or-Practice Meets Bruen
As Jared notes, the DOJ is proceeding under 34 U.S.C. § 12601 – the “pattern or practice” authority typically used to reform police departments that violate constitutional rights. Marrying that civil-rights tool to Bruen-era carry rights is novel. It says, in effect, that unconstitutional administration of a permitting scheme is as actionable as a substantive ban. That synergy is the most interesting legal development here. If a federal judge agrees that extended administrative delay equals denial, jurisdictions using “process as punishment” will face a very different risk calculus.
CRPA’s Take: We Paved the Road – Now Drive It
Michael Dorgan also quotes CRPA president and general counsel Chuck Michel, who says his group spent years forcing counties to move toward Bruen-compliant processes, and that “stubborn jurisdictions” like Los Angeles dug in with delays, fees, and new requirements. From CRPA’s vantage point, the DOJ suit validates their county-by-county trench work. It’s not often you see grassroots litigators and the U.S. Department of Justice rowing in the same direction on gun policy; that alignment alone could change the incentives for local officials statewide.
Four Boxes Diner’s Historical Frame
Attorney Mark W. Smith at The Four Boxes Diner calls the move “unprecedented,” placing it alongside historic DOJ civil rights interventions in other domains. He lauds Attorney General Pam Bondi and AAG Harmeet Dhillon for bringing federal muscle against what he describes as a refusal to honor Heller, McDonald, and Bruen. You don’t have to buy every analogy to see the import: the federal government is asserting that Bruen’s right to carry means something operational, and that Washington is prepared to enforce that meaning when a local agency ignores it.
Where This Could Go Next
Copper Jacket TV notes Dhillon has signaled investigations beyond Los Angeles, and Guns & Gadgets warns that if DOJ wins here, slow-walkers in New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and elsewhere could be next. That tracks with the press release’s call for applicants nationwide – anyone who’s heard nothing after four months—to email a dedicated inbox monitored by DOJ attorneys. That’s not just litigation; it’s a pipeline to build additional pattern-or-practice cases. If you’re a county official, that’s a flashing red light to fix bottlenecks – fast.
What LASD Might Say – and Why It May Not Fly
Fox News’ Michael Dorgan reports that LASD didn’t immediately comment. The default defense in cases like this is capacity: staffing shortages, background check backlogs, and the like. But those arguments look weak against statutory deadlines, a Supreme Court mandate recognizing an individual carry right, and raw numbers like “two approvals” out of thousands. It’s hard to persuade a judge that your process is shall-issue in spirit when the approval rate rounds to zero and interviews are booked two years out.
My Read on the Stakes
This lawsuit is about more than Los Angeles County. It’s a test of whether Bruen’s promise can survive in the administrative trenches. If a federal court agrees that calendar gamesmanship is a constitutional injury, permitting offices everywhere will need to retool quickly – triage backlogs, publish queues, hit statutory clocks, and remove tripwires that serve no historical or public-safety function. The more interesting remedy question is structural: will the court simply order LASD to comply, or require a compliance plan with metrics and oversight? The answer could set the template for fast, scalable fixes.
A Note on the Permits vs. Permitless Debate
William at Copper Jacket TV argues this whole mess proves why constitutional carry should be national: a right shouldn’t depend on a county clerk. That argument has intuitive appeal, but the path he suggests – Congress flipping the switch – would be a political Everest. In the meantime, most states still run “shall-issue” systems, and Bruen kept that lane open with guardrails. For those systems to be legitimate, they can’t be weaponized by delay. Even if you favor permitless carry, rooting out administrative obstruction helps real people right now.
The Bottom Line – and What to Watch
From DOJ’s press release to Dorgan’s reporting to the detailed reactions from Copper Jacket TV, Guns & Gadgets, and The Four Boxes Diner, the throughline is unmistakable: unprecedented federal support for carry applicants facing what DOJ calls “egregious” delays. Watch for early rulings on injunctive relief, any move toward a consent decree, and concrete performance metrics – application-to-interview timelines, approval rates, and total pending files. If the court puts teeth behind Bruen’s promises, this case won’t just fix Los Angeles. It’ll send a message nationwide: the Constitution governs the process too.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa is our dedicated Second Amendment news writer and also focuses on homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Lisa aims to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.
