state police.jpg

A federal judge is giving state Trooper Michael Keyes another shot at restoring his private gun ownership rights.

( )

Saying justice has not been applied fairly, a federal judge has revived a lawsuit by a state trooper who is barred from having a gun when he isn't at work.



The ruling U.S. Middle District Judge John E. Jones III issued this week marks the first victory following a string of legal defeats for Michael L. Keyes of Perry County.



Keyes has lost fights in Jones' court and in the state Superior Court in his attempt to restore his right to own a firearm as a private citizen. He currently is barred from individual gun ownership because he was involuntarily committed for mental health treatment in 2006 amid what Jones described as an "emotionally devastating" divorce.



Yet an exception in the law has allowed Keyes to possess guns, including pistols, shotguns and fully automatic rifles, while on duty as a cop.



Jones last year dismissed a federal lawsuit Keyes filed in which the officer claimed his constitutionally-protected right to bear arms was violated. The judge concluded that suit was voided by the Superior Court's denial in 2013 of Keyes' same constitutional claim.



The latest decision by Jones revives Keyes' federal suit. Jones based that revival on the outcome of another case involving Jonathan K. Yox of Lancaster County, a state prison corrections officer who also was barred from having a firearm outside of work.



Like Keyes, the gun ban imposed on Yox was based on prior mental health commitments for suicidal tendencies. Keyes' involuntary commitments occurred when he was an adult. Yox was committed as a juvenile. Yox later enlisted in the Army, served in combat in Afghanistan and was not recommended for further psychological evaluation after completing his tour, Jones noted.



Keyes petitioned for reconsideration of the dismissal of his federal suit after Jones issued a decision in July upholding Yox's claim that his right to bear arms was improperly violated.



Jones agreed that there is a disparity in the outcome of the two nearly identical cases, and concluded there is justification in Keyes' case to override the usual legal bar against hearing a constitutional claim in federal court that already has been denied by a state court.



"This case represents extraordinary circumstances and...Keyes will suffer manifest injustice should we refuse to revisit our order of dismissal," Jones wrote.



He found that his ruling allowing Yox full firearm ownership rights constitutes a "significant change in the legal atmosphere" that in all fairness mandates a revisiting of Keyes' case. "We would be hard pressed to think of a better example of an inequitable administration of justice and it is a circumstance that cries out to be rectified," Jones wrote.



"This court," he added, "is duty-bound to apply the laws in a fashion that affords justice to all parties," he added.



So, Jones put Keyes' lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch back on the federal docket for further argument.





