Dom Ervolina
@dominicervolina.com
69K followers
2.8K following
8.7K posts
Progressive Liberal, Unapologetically Snarky, and I like my Oxford commas | he/him | Executive Recruiter | My newsletter: https://unburdened.blog | Signal: domsignal.16
Posts
Media
Videos
Starter Packs
Reposted by Dom Ervolina
![Gun Owners of America
@GunOwners
.@AGPamBondi is creating a registry of gun
owners.
ER
...
AUN
IN OWNE
Follow
OF
AMERIC
Gun Owners of Ame ...
BREAKING
@AGPamBondi has convinced a federal judge to
order @2AFND to turn over a list of its members.
AMERIN
@GunOw ... . Oct 7
hereby enjoined, within the jurisdictional boundaries of the United States Court of
Appcals for the Fifth Circuit (i.e., Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas), from enforcing
the provisions referenced in paragraph 3, to the extent those provisions prevent the sale
or delivery of handguns and/or handgun ammunition by and to persons identified in
paragraph 2 on account of the buyer being 18 to 20 years old.
5. Within twenty-one (21) days of issuance of this Judgment, those Plaintiffs identified at
paragraph 2(b) shall provide to Defendants a verified list of their members as of
November 6, 2020.
6. Count II of the operative complaint is moot and dismissed without prejudice.
7. The parties shall bear their own costs and fees.
THUS DONE in Chambers on this 7th day of October, 2025.
B.
The practical result of any injunction that would apply to a host of individuals unknown to
Defendants or to the Court would make compliance with such injunction a practical impossibility.
To aveid contempt under such an injunction, Defendants might be necessitated to prohibit the
application of the challenged laws natioewide. But such a result would in effect grant Plaintiffs
all the benefits of being granted a universal injunction, which (as previously explained) would both
exceed this Court's jurisdiction and be contrary to the decisions of ether Courts of Appeals. See
supra at I. The Court should not award relief that would result in Plaintiffs obtaining a "backdoor
to [a] universal injunction[]." Washington v. Trump, 145 F.4th 1013, 1040 (9th Cir. 2025)
(Bumatay, J., concurring and dissenting in part).
In sum, Defendants" proposed judgment appropriately limits its scope to members of the
organizational pla](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:s2jiq5q6f5uhl7ywqbxtsvmu/bafkreideriuy6c7extjzdki34h3sfsphhyenq5fqjwtxwwytkcsvtee4bi@jpeg)
Reposted by Dom Ervolina
