TexasCHLforum.com

TexasTornado wrote:

ELB wrote:

Papa_Tiger wrote:

ELB wrote:I thought the rules promulgated by the President (as modified by the Regents) had the force of law once adopted?

Only if provided notice via 30.06:

TPC 46.035 wrote:(a-2) Notwithstanding Subsection (a) or Section 46.03(a), a license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on the campus of a private or independent institution of higher education in this state that has established rules, regulations, or other provisions prohibiting license holders from carrying handguns pursuant to Section 411.2031(e), Government Code, or on the grounds or building on which an activity sponsored by such an institution is being conducted, or in a passenger transportation vehicle of such an institution, regardless of whether the handgun is concealed, provided the institution gives effective notice under Section 30.06.

The easiest method to ensure that there is no question of the location being off limits is the posting of a 30.06 sign at each off limits location.

Ah. Saying the notice must be given is a lot different than "it's not even illegal to bring your weapon into areas of campus restricted by policy." I'll will bet that every student and employee will sooner or later be required to sign a statement containing language that meets the statute. They'll post signs as well, but the lack of one will not legally assist anyone who has signed a statement, just non-students/employees.

Restricted by policy is different than restricted by signage.

I'm curious about private institutions. Won't they have to post a 30.06 on every building?

v7a wrote:Still no decision from the court. Only five business days left before classes start.

v7a wrote:UT Austin classes start on Wednesday, August 24th.

bblhd672 wrote:I hope the judge doesn't issue a decision prior to class starting - forcing those 3 professors to either teach their class and allow LTC concealed carry or boycotting their duties as employees of UTA.

The court concludes at this stage in the proceedings that requiring public universities to
allow licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns is a basis for the Campus Carry Law that
bears a debatably rational relationship to the conceivable legitimate governmental end of
enabling individuals to defend themselves. See Reid, 979 F.2d at 1087. Further, the court
concludes that allowing private universities to prohibit concealed carry by licensed individuals

Case 1:16-cv-00845-LY Document 54 Filed 08/22/16 Page 9 of 11

bears a rational relationship to the legitimate governmental interest of respecting the private property rights of private universities.

It appears to the court that neither the Texas Legislature nor the Board of Regents has
overstepped its legitimate power to determine where a licensed individual may carry a concealed
handgun in an academic setting. The court concludes that Plaintiffs have failed to establish a
substantial likelihood of success on their equal-protection claim under the Fourteenth
Amendment.
IV. CONCLUSION
Because Plaintiffs at this time have failed to establish a substantial likelihood of ultimate
success on the merits of their asserted claims, their request for immediate relief must fail. The
court therefore need not and does not reach the remaining requirements for granting a
preliminary injunction. Bluefleld, 577 F.3d at 253 ("[A] preliminary injunction is an
extraordinary remedy which should not be granted unless the party seeking it has 'clearly carried
the burden ofpersuasion' on all four requirements."). Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Application for Preliminary Injunction (Clerk's Doc.
No. 20) is DENIED.
SIGNED this of August, 2016

v7a wrote:Preliminary Injunction has been DENIED.

TreyHouston wrote:

v7a wrote:Preliminary Injunction has been DENIED.

THANKS FOR THE UPDATE!!!! Of course I've seen nothing on the news !!!!