AG Neronha and RI State Police's Weaver Sued by Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association

AG Neronha and RI State Police's Weaver Sued by Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association

Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha and Rhode Island State Police Superintendent Darnell Weaver were hit with a lawsuit filed by the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA) in Federal Court on Thursday.

The law enforcement officers sued that the Rhode Island law on concealed weapons is not only inconsistent with federal law, but places retired officers at risk of being prosecuted and the potential of facing jail.

FLEOA claims to be the largest nonpartisan, nonprofit professional association exclusively representing federal law enforcement officers throughout the United States. It represents more than 30,000 federal law enforcement officers from over 65 different agencies.

GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLAST

The lawsuit was crafted by a Princeton, New Jersey law firm — Blank Rome.

The 16-page lawsuit claims that “The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (“LEOSA”) confers a uniform, national right for retired law enforcement officers to carry a concealed firearm if: (1) they are “qualified” under LEOSA, and (2) they are carrying LEOSA-compliant identification.”

The suit asserts that Rhode Island’s law is inconsistent with federal law.

“In violation of this federal right, Rhode Island criminalizes the concealed carry of a firearm unless the retired officer obtain a separate, Rhode-Island specific permit. The Rhode Island permit is not a LEOSA identification. Moreover, unlike LEOSA identification, the Rhode Island permit requires a separate application fee, imposes more onerous requirements than otherwise mandated by LEOSA, and can be denied or revoked in the sole discretion of the Superintendent of State Police.”

FLEOA, in the suit, “seeks a declaration that Rhode Island’s laws are preempted and seeks a judgment that the enforcement of those laws violates the rights of its members.”

In 2022, FLEOA filed a similar case in New Jersey, and it was reported that the law enforcement organization won the lawsuit. That case was appealed.

According to FLEOA's law firm in a statement, "In a unanimous opinion issued on February 14, 2024, the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s ruling and concluded that the LEOSA preempts contrary aspects of New Jersey law and provides qualified retired officers, including those who retired from New Jersey agencies, with an enforceable right to concealed carry under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act, and upheld the district court’s injunction."

The attorneys on the New Jersey appeal are the lead on the Rhode Island lawsuit -  Michael R. Darbee and Nicholas C. Harbist. 

 

Rhode Island Requires Its Own Permit

The lawsuit states, “Rhode Island law prohibits an individual from carrying a concealed firearm unless they have a state-issued license or permit. The State has created its own state-specific scheme for retired police officers to obtain a permit to carry a concealed firearm (“RPO Permit”)…A Rhode Island RPO Permit is not LEOSA identification. Moreover, the Rhode Island RPO Permit imposes more onerous requirements that do not exist under LEOSA (such as requiring twenty years of service, rather than ten years under LEOSA).”

Another inconsistency between federal law and Rhode Island’s statute is the Rhode Island RPO Permit is only valid for four years, according to the lawsuit. 

The FLEOA says, “In addition, the decision to issue a Rhode Island RPO Permit by the Attorney General is discretionary (“may issue”) and, once issued, the Rhode Island RPO Permit may be revoked—again, at the discretion of the State—at any time for ‘just cause.’ Indeed, ‘a pistol permit is a privilege left to the sole discretion of the Attorney General.’”

 

The Controversy

The Lawsuit states, “The controversy exists because of the following:

A. These members are subject to arrest and prosecution under Rhode Island law for possessing a concealed firearm if they do not have a Rhode Island RPO Permit—even if those members are otherwise entitled to carry a concealed firearm under LEOSA.

B. To avoid prosecution under Rhode Island law, these members are forced to apply for a Rhode Island RPO Permit before they may carry a concealed firearm in Rhode Island.

The lawsuit asks the court to:

[Declare] that the Rhode Island law is preempted as applied to individuals who are entitled to carry a concealed firearm under LEOSA;

[Enjoin] the State of Rhode Island, the Attorney General, and the Superintendent of State Police from arresting and prosecuting under those individuals who are entitled to carry a concealed firearm under LEOSA;

[Enjoin] the State of Rhode Island, the Attorney General, and the Superintendent of State Police from requiring individuals who are entitled to carry a concealed firearm under LEOSA, to obtain a Rhode Island RPO Permit from the Superintendent of State Police;

[Enjoin] the State of Rhode Island, the Attorney General, and the Superintendent of State Police from imposing any other conditions to carry a firearm not specifically required by LEOSA...