FPC Sues Over Denver Carry Ban as Colorado and Denver Point Fingers at Each Other’s Laws, Leaving a Four-Permit California Visitor With No Way to Carry

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

DENVER, CO — Colorado says its law lets you open carry. Denver bans open carry outright, then says a California man’s out-of-state permits already let him carry concealed. Colorado won’t recognize those permits for him. The Firearms Policy Coalition says that circle, laid out in Colorado’s and Denver’s court filings on Wednesday, Nov. 11, leaves peaceable visitors with no lawful way to carry a handgun in Denver. FPC calls it a “Wizard of Oz” defense.

The case is Gene Hoffman v. City and County of Denver, No. 1:26-cv-04837-PAB, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. Hoffman is an FPC member and California resident who holds concealed-carry permits from California, Utah, Arizona, and Florida, and who travels to Denver two or three times a year to visit friends and a son enrolled at Colorado State University. FPC and Hoffman sued this fall and asked the court for a preliminary injunction, an emergency order that would block the carry restrictions before the full case plays out. The Nov. 11 filings are the responses from the Denver District Attorney, the Denver defendants, and the state defendants, all opposing that request.

Here is the interlock the dispute turns on. In their filings, the state defendants argue that Colorado does not ban public carry at all, because open carry is legal statewide without a permit. The Denver defendants argue that Hoffman can already carry concealed in the city today, because Denver’s ordinance has an exception for a permit holder “carrying the handgun in conformance with any applicable federal, state, or local law.” The catch is the state-law condition. Colorado only recognizes a nonresident’s concealed-carry permit if that person’s home state recognizes Colorado’s permits in return, under C.R.S. § 18-12-213. California does not, so for Hoffman the condition fails and the city exception he is pointed to does not open. Each government points to the other’s law. FPC says the combined result is a ban neither one wants to own.

Here is the permit piece in plain terms. States honor out-of-state carry permits in two ways. Some simply recognize outside permits on their own, no agreement required. Others, like Colorado, only honor permits from states that honor theirs back. That mutual-recognition model is exactly what shuts Hoffman out: a California permit means nothing in Colorado because California does not return the favor. My Colorado concealed carry guide and my reciprocity maps lay out which states recognize which permits.

Denver also points to two fallbacks. The ordinance allows open or concealed carry “with valid authorization from the city,” and the police chief stated in a declaration that he would have considered a request from Hoffman for that authorization. The ordinance separately allows a handgun to be transported in a private vehicle. FPC’s answer is that a permission slip a city official “would have considered” is discretion, not a right, and that a car exception does nothing for a man who wants to carry while walking from his parking spot to a restaurant.

“Colorado and Denver want everyone to ignore what their laws actually do,” FPC President Brandon Combs said in the group’s announcement. “Colorado points to open carry, knowing Denver bans it. Denver points to concealed carry, knowing Colorado won’t recognize the permits held by peaceable visitors. Their entire defense amounts to ‘Pay no attention to the gun ban behind the curtain.’ But this isn’t Oz, and the Constitution isn’t an illusion.” Combs pointed to FPC’s 2025 summary-judgment win in Chris Hoffman v. Bonta, which struck down California’s ban on nonresident carry, as proof that the right to carry does not stop at a state line.

The governments’ filings do not rest on the finger-pointing alone. All three argue Hoffman lacks standing because he can open carry under state law and never applied for a Colorado permit or for city authorization, so he has not been denied anything. They argue there is no emergency, noting he has visited Denver for years and waited until this fall to sue. And they argue he is unlikely to win on the merits under New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the 2022 Supreme Court decision holding that a government may eliminate one mode of public carry, concealed or open, as long as it leaves the other available. Denver says it eliminates neither. The state defendants lean on Peterson v. Martinez, a 2013 Tenth Circuit ruling that upheld Colorado’s nonresident reciprocity scheme and held that concealed carry is not protected by the Second Amendment or the Privileges and Immunities Clause.

FPC’s reply, in short, is that Peterson predates Bruen and that the governments cannot wall their laws off from each other. Its position is that once you look at Colorado’s permit rules and Denver’s carry ordinance together, the way a visitor actually lives under both at once, what is left is no meaningful way to carry, and no historical tradition supports disarming an otherwise-qualified American simply because he lives in another state.

Denver has been here before. The Second Amendment Foundation led a coalition of 18 gun rights groups in an amicus brief, a filing from outside groups who are not parties but want the court to hear their view, in earlier Tenth Circuit litigation brought by Washington resident Gray Peterson over the same combination of Denver’s open-carry ban and Colorado’s refusal to recognize a nonresident’s out-of-state licenses. A parallel suit is live right now too: the state’s filing references Howeth v. City and County of Denver, the case behind the NRA’s own lawsuit challenging Denver’s nonresident handgun carry ban, which targets the same two bodies of law.

More from USA Carry:

• Denied Over the State on His Driver’s License: NRA Sues Denver, Says Visitors Have No Legal Way to Carry a Gun There
• Colorado Concealed Carry Numbers Remain Strong as Semi-Auto Gun Ban Legislation Looms
• DOJ Sues City of Denver Over Assault Weapons Ban, Calls Local Ordinance a Civil Rights Violation Under Second Amendment
• Governor Polis Quietly Signs Sweeping Semiautomatic Firearm Ban Into Law Behind Closed Doors
• DOJ Sues Montgomery County Over 100-Yard Gun-Free Buffer Zones That Make It Almost Impossible to Legally Carry Down the Street

A serious carry mindset means knowing the law everywhere you travel before you pack. For a visitor headed to Denver, that homework ends at two governments each pointing to the other one’s statute book.

I will continue tracking Hoffman v. Denver and the parallel challenges to Colorado and Denver’s carry restrictions as the court takes up the preliminary injunction.

Read the original story: FPC Sues Over Denver Carry Ban as Colorado and Denver Point Fingers at Each Other’s Laws, Leaving a Four-Permit California Visitor With No Way to Carry