RIVERTON — A 62-year-old disabled veteran from Boulder, Wyo., says when he drove five hours to F.E. Warren Air Force Base’s Main Exchange to pick up two firearms he’d already ordered online, he was met with a glitch.
The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) review of the man, who carries a Department of Defense “Identification and Privilege Card” proving his 100% disabled veteran status, came back “delayed.”
That delay has spanned at least two weeks, and on Aug. 16, Gary Gorski filed suit in federal court against the U.S. government. His lawsuit claims the NICS delay deprived him of his Second Amendment rights and violated federal law.
Gorski’s lawsuit asks for an order compelling the federal government to hand over the guns – “to be enjoined from delaying” the background check – within an hour of the ruling. The suit also asks that the court compel the FBI and NICS to prevent future delays for all firearms background checks for “authorized military exchanges” and to provide proper oversight and resources to accomplish that task.
Gorski’s story
According to the lawsuit, Gorski is a veteran and lawful gun owner who has never been convicted of an offense that would prohibit him from owning or purchasing a firearm; as a veteran, he’s undergone many background checks and fingerprinting throughout his career.
The F.E. Warren Main Exchange had a sale on Sig Sauers, and on or about July 23, 2024, Gorski ordered a P320 handgun and an MCX Spear rifle online from the air base outlet. Taking advantage of also not having to pay a sales tax there, Gorski took on the five-hour drive from his home after the Main Exchange told him his firearms had arrived.
But when Gorski got to the base, he learned his NICS check had come back “delayed,” the suit states.
Those checks either come back as “proceed,” “denied” or “delayed.” The FBI must resolve “delayed” responses within three business days, and if it doesn’t, “it is ultimately at the discretion of the firearm dealer to decide whether to complete the sale,” according to the suit.
Gorski’s legal filing says that after several days, on Aug. 6, instead of the situation being resolved, the F.E. Warren Main Exchange told him NICS would not provide a “proceed” response, and the Exchange wouldn’t release the firearms until it did, because of Main Exchange’s own policies.
‘Perpetual limbo’
Gorski claims the NICS system itself is flawed and that it’s not set up to meet that three-day threshold.
“The crux of the case lies in the indefinite and arbitrary nature of the NICS background check process, which leaves [Gorski] guessing if he will ever receive a ‘proceed’ response,” the lawsuit states. “The lack of urgency built into the system demonstrates a fundamental flaw, as though it is entirely acceptable to leave both [Gorski] and the Base Exchange in perpetual limbo.”
The federal suit goes on to stress Gorksi’s military service and the checks he’s already undergone, “further underscoring the lack of justification for the current delay. The indefinite nature of this process, without any set timeframe or accountability, violates [Gorski’s] Second Amendment rights but also imposes undue burdens on the Base Exchange, creating a ripple effect of inefficiency and uncertainty.”
“This delay is unjustifiable given [Gorski’s] clear history and eligibility, and it exemplifies an administrative failure that necessitates immediate judicial intervention,” the suit reads.
The defendants, relief
Gorski’s federal lawsuit names the United States of America; Merrick Garland, in his official capacity as U.S. attorney general; and the FBI as defendants.
The suit cites 18 U.S. Code 925A – Remedy for erroneous denial of firearm, and 5 U.S.C.S 706 – Administrative Procedures Act, along with the Second Amendment claims as its foundation.
As far as relief? Gorski wants his guns. The lawsuit says money can’t fix this problem.
“This deprivation results in irreparable injury because constitutional rights are inherently valuable, and any infringement upon them damages the plaintiff in a way that cannot be remedied by monetary compensation or future corrections,” it reads.
His federal lawsuit also asks that the courts compel the federal government not to impose such delays again on another vet.
Most Popular
Comments / 0