Lawyers for state and gun rights advocates spar during hearing

Beyond the gun advocates’ objections that the law violates the “right to bear arms” guaranteed in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, they argued during Thursday’s 75-minute hearing that Delaware officials botched the rollout of the permitting process.

State police, who oversee the State Bureau of Identification, did not have an application available until Oct. 28, 19 days before prospective buyers would be required to present a laminated permit similar to a driver’s license to make a purchase.

Since state officials have 30 days to decide on a permit, the gun rights lobby argued in court filings and before Noreika that the delays in opening the application portal could create an unconstitutional de facto ban on purchasing a handgun starting Sunday.

They also asserted that SBI’s requirements should have gone through the state’s copious process to create regulations, which often takes several months and gives residents time to offer comments on proposed rules.

“The government, the state, is treating this natural right [to buy handguns] like it were a government gift, like food stamps,’’ Pileggi said during the hearing. “Due to their lack of planning, they waited until the last minute” to open an application process filled with obstacles for would-be handgun buyers.

“Now they say because a few permits have been issued, [his clients] should be happy and go home,” he added.

Lawyers for the state countered that more than 200 permits have already been issued, though they acknowledged that all but three were approved for law enforcement officers and others exempted from taking the training course or firing live rounds at a shooting range. The state also argued that while regulations can be put in place to implement a law, they are not required.

Noreika, however, said during the hearing that it appeared to her that state police added requirements that were not in the law and normally would require official regulations.

She noted a couple provisions cited by Pileggi that are on the state’s website as “firearms training course guidelines.” Those rules say SBI must approve training courses and instructors. The law does not require such approvals.

Noreika also personalized her inquiry. She speculated that if she had taken a FBI firearms course three years ago, she might think it wasn’t valid since the FBI is not on the state website’s list of approved instructors.

While state attorney Austin Evers said SBI would merely check that the FBI course meets the requirements outlined in the law, Noreika countered that she would have no way of knowing that if she wanted to get a permit, and might think she needed to take a new course, which could take weeks to schedule and complete.

Evers said the state would remove those provisions to clear up any confusion among permit seekers and to remain within the bounds of the law so no official regulations would need to be proposed, reviewed and approved — a process that takes several months.

The state’s lawyer also told the judge that the law and how it’s being implemented is the opposite of a ban and will result in fewer handgun deaths.

“This statute has two core principles: a scheme to allow people to buy and and sell handguns — not a total ban — to address real threats to public safety,’’ Evers said.

Jennings, who attended Thursday’s hearing, said afterward that regardless of what Noreika decided on the injunction issue, she believes the law that was passed in 2024 after a five-year legislative effort will ultimately be upheld.

Jennings said afterward that she didn’t think Noreika would issue an injunction because the judge would first need to determine that the lawsuit had a “likelihood of success on the merits.’’

She said similar permit bills have been upheld in other states — such as in neighboring Maryland — and that in Delaware, “we firmly believe that this law is constitutional and passes muster.”