Key Takeaways
- The lawsuit Moser v. Nessel challenges Michigan’s pistol purchase permit system in federal court.
- Plaintiffs argue that the License to Purchase is redundant and unconstitutional, as it allows local agencies to deny permits without solid reasoning.
- Several individuals detail how they faced unjust denials from police departments despite passing federal background checks.
- The lawsuit also targets Michigan’s pistol records system, which plaintiffs claim acts as a de facto registry without proper regulations.
- This case could impact permit-to-purchase laws across multiple states if the court rules against Michigan’s system.
Estimated reading time: 4 minutes
GRAND RAPIDS, MICH. — The National Rifle Association and three Michigan gun rights groups have dragged the state’s pistol purchase permit system into federal court, and they picked a strong target.
The lawsuit, Moser v. Nessel, was filed June 14 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan. It challenges Michigan’s License to Purchase, or LTP, the permit a resident without a concealed pistol license must get before buying a handgun.
Here is the core problem. A law-abiding adult can walk into a gun shop, pass the federal NICS background check, and still get turned away because a local police chief refused to sign off on a separate state permit.
The plaintiffs argue that permit is redundant, discretionary, and unconstitutional under the Supreme Court’s 2022 Bruen ruling.
Michigan lets a local agency deny an LTP on “probable cause” that the applicant would be a threat or would commit an offense with the gun. The complaint calls that a predictive, standardless judgment with no meaningful appeal.
The filing puts it bluntly, describing the statute as “shall issue” in form but “may issue” in operation.
The four individual plaintiffs show how that plays out.
Dean Moser says Troy police denied him over old “contacts” that were misrepresented. When he applied in Battle Creek, he says he was denied automatically based on Troy’s earlier decision. Neither department offered an appeal.
Thomas Overly was denied by Kentwood police. He went to the FBI, which confirmed he had no prohibiting record and issued him a federal identification number. Kentwood still refused to let him buy.
David Raney says the Kalamazoo County Sheriff’s Office turned him away before he could even fill out an application, telling him he was not a county resident.
Reagan Janson was denied by Walker police on “probable cause” because the department believed she had applied in other jurisdictions.
More from USA Carry:
The suit also targets Michigan’s pistol records system. Every handgun sale gets reported to a statewide database run by the Michigan State Police, linking specific guns to specific owners. The plaintiffs call that a de facto registry with no historical pedigree, the exact kind of regulation Bruen put under the microscope.
The defendants include Attorney General Dana Nessel, Michigan State Police Director Col. James Grady II, and several cities, police chiefs, and a county sheriff who administer the permits.
The plaintiffs want the court to strike the licensing and registration provisions, block enforcement, and order the state to purge firearm ownership records tied to the plaintiffs.
I have said it before. A right you have to ask permission to exercise is not a right, it is a privilege. Michigan stacked a permission slip on top of a federal background check that already does the job, then handed local officials a discretionary veto with no appeal. That is the abusive, discretionary licensing Bruen warned against.
This case reaches past Michigan. Permit-to-purchase laws sit on the books in several states, and a federal ruling here could shape how courts treat all of them. I will be tracking Moser v. Nessel as it moves through the Western District.
