It’s been two weeks since Republican Attorney General and gubernatorial hopeful Adam Laxalt was asked to stop the online publication of blueprints for untraceable 3-D firearms — which could be acquired by criminals, terrorists, and other dangerous individuals without a background check — but Laxalt has been silent.
Two weeks ago today, Nevada Congresswoman Dina Titus (NV-01) wrote to Laxalt urging him to use his power as attorney general to protect Nevadans from dangerous individuals seeking to evade background checks and acquire blueprints for 3-D guns, but the clock is ticking and Laxalt has yet to answer. Earlier this month, 11 additional states joined the lawsuit, including Colorado’s Republican attorney general, bringing the total to 19 states. A federal judge has granted a temporary injunction on the online publication of the 3-D gun blueprints, and another hearing is set to occur later this month.
Even though a fellow Nevada elected official urged Laxalt to use his office to protect Nevadans, Laxalt has a long history of siding with the gun lobby — which supports 3-D blueprints for untraceable guns — over his state. He campaigned for the NRA’s $6.6 million initiative to defeat a 2016 background check expansion measure known as Question 1, and has since refused to work to enforce it after the voters approved it. Laxalt’s refusal to work to enforce Question 1 caused the Giffords Center to lower Nevada’s gun violence prevention score from a C- to a D. When asked what he would do to put Question 1 into place, Laxalt said, “I wouldn’t change anything as governor.”
In the past, Laxalt has used the excuse that he wasn’t asked or invited to join lawsuits to stop dangerous moves by the Trump administration — like its proposal to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census, or its family separation policy, or its decision to end net neutrality. But this time, Laxalt has no such excuse — so will he finally stand up to protect Nevadans?
Nevada State Democratic Party spokeswoman Helen Kalla released the following statement:
“How can voters expect Adam Laxalt to ‘protect Nevada’ when he wants dangerous people who’d fail a background check to get their hands on deadly firearms? Laxalt must decide whether he’ll side with the gun lobby’s agenda or with the safety of Nevada’s communities. Unfortunately for Nevadans, Laxalt’s track record shows that he’ll never do what’s best for them if it means going against the will of his special interest puppet masters in Washington.”