Federal restrictions on carrying firearms in national parks and associated federal facilities are being challenged as unconstitutional by a coalition of gun rights organizations and an individual plaintiff. The lawsuit, filed by Gary Zimmerman, Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., and Second Amendment Foundation in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas on March 27, 2026, names Pamela Bondi in her official capacity as Attorney General of the United States as the defendant.
The plaintiffs argue that two federal provisions—18 U.S.C. § 930(a), which prohibits knowingly possessing a firearm in a federal facility, and 36 C.F.R. § 1.5, which allows park officials to impose additional restrictions on firearm carriage—violate their constitutional rights under the Second Amendment. According to the complaint, these laws bar law-abiding citizens from carrying firearms for self-defense when visiting national parks or entering buildings such as visitor centers or ranger stations located within those parks.
Gary Zimmerman is described in the filing as a law-abiding adult citizen residing in Fort Worth, Texas. He is an NRA-certified firearms instructor with licenses to carry handguns in ten states. Zimmerman reports that he and his wife frequently visit national parks for recreation and possess lifetime passes. The complaint details how Zimmerman has visited Big Bend National Park almost annually for eight years and other parks multiple times over the past decade. Due to fear of prosecution under current laws, Zimmerman states he is forced to disarm before entering federal facilities within parks or areas where firearms are prohibited: “when Plaintiff Zimmerman enters a federal facility within a park to acquire a permit or supplies, he disarms before entering, usually by placing his firearm in a safe he keeps for that purpose in the glovebox of his car.” He further notes that such facilities are not provided with security ensuring no one brings a firearm into the building.
The organizational plaintiffs—the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF)—bring claims on behalf of their members who wish to exercise their right to carry firearms for self-defense in national parks but refrain due to fear of prosecution. Both organizations describe themselves as dedicated to defending individuals’ rights under the Second Amendment through advocacy, litigation, education, and outreach efforts.
The legal argument presented by plaintiffs relies heavily on recent Supreme Court precedent established in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022). The complaint cites Bruen’s holding that “the law-abiding citizens of this Nation have a general right to carry firearms for self-defense in public,” which can only be restricted under “exceptional circumstances.” Plaintiffs assert that because their conduct—carrying arms publicly for self-defense—is covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment, any restriction must be justified by historical tradition.
According to plaintiffs, Bruen limits government authority to restrict firearms only at locations analogous to founding-era legislative assemblies, polling places, or courthouses—places characterized by comprehensive government-provided security. They contend that most federal facilities within national parks do not provide such security measures: “The federal government does not comprehensively secure federal facilities located within national parks.” Therefore, they argue there is no “well-established, representative historical analogue” justifying bans imposed by 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) or restrictions under 36 C.F.R. § 1.5.
Plaintiffs seek several forms of relief from the court: issuance of a declaratory judgment stating that both contested provisions are unconstitutional insofar as they bar possession and carrying of firearms within national parks; issuance of a permanent injunction enjoining enforcement of these laws; award of costs and reasonable attorney’s fees; and any other legal or equitable relief deemed appropriate by the court.
Attorneys representing plaintiffs include R. Brent Cooper (Cooper & Scully P.C., Dallas), David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson, and William V. Bergstrom (Cooper & Kirk PLLC., Washington D.C.). The case is identified as Case No. 4:26-cv-00372-Y.
Source: 426cv00372_Gary_Zimmerman_v_Pamela_Bondi_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Texas.pdf
