Colorado and Denver Ask Federal Judge to Deny FPC Injunction Over Carry by Visitors From 15 States Without Reciprocity

Colorado’s state defendants, the City and County of Denver and Denver District Attorney John Walsh each asked a federal judge on Nov. 11, 2026 to deny the preliminary injunction that Gene Hoffman and the Firearms Policy Coalition seek in Hoffman v. City and County of Denver, No. 1:26-cv-04837. The state’s response rests on Peterson v. Martinez, the Tenth Circuit’s 2013 decision upholding Colorado’s nonresident permit rules, and Denver’s response argues that Hoffman “may carry a concealed handgun under Denver’s ordinance today.”

The suit, filed Sept. 29 in the District of Colorado and assigned to Judge Philip A. Brimmer, attacks the combined effect of Colorado’s residency-based permit rules and Denver’s open-carry ban. The amended complaint says Colorado has reciprocity with 34 states and none with 15 states and the District of Columbia, a list that runs from California and Connecticut through New York, Oregon, South Carolina and Washington. Colorado recognizes an out-of-state permit only when it was issued to a resident of the issuing state, so a California permit holder cannot use permits from other states either. Hoffman, of Emerald Hills, California, holds permits from California, Utah, Arizona and Florida, visits Denver two or three times a year to see friends and his son at Colorado State University, and last visited in May 2026 with his next trip set for January 2027, his declaration says.

The plaintiffs’ Oct. 7 motion asks the court to “enjoin Defendants from enforcing Colorado and Denver’s unconstitutional carry regime against nonresidents” and to “order Defendants to grant carry licenses to nonresidents,” arguing that under Bruen the two bodies of law together leave visitors from non-reciprocity states no lawful way to carry, and that Colorado’s residency rule violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause.

Colorado Bureau of Investigation Director Armando Saldate III and State Patrol Chief Matthew Packard answer that Colorado’s “lenient public-carry firearm regime allows the open carry of handguns without a permit” and that Peterson v. Martinez is “binding and on-point precedent” for its reciprocity scheme. Their brief says Hoffman “unilaterally delayed at least five months (and likely much longer) before bringing suit,” that the motion would have the court “create a brand-new permitting regime for nonresidents on a preliminary basis,” and that the Eleventh Amendment bars the claims against state officers. It closes with one sentence: “This Court should deny Plaintiffs’ Motion.”

Denver, Police Chief Ron Thomas and Sheriff Elias Diggins argue that Hoffman lacks standing because Section 38-118(d) of the city code allows concealed carry by a person who “holds a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun and the person is carrying the handgun in conformance with any applicable federal, state, or local law,” and because the ordinance allows open or concealed carry “with valid authorization from the city.” The city says it has “regulated open carry since at least 1952 and concealed carry since the nineteenth century,” and that an injunction covering FPC’s members would run into the Supreme Court’s 2025 limit on relief for non-parties in Trump v. CASA. In a declaration executed Nov. 10, Thomas states that Hoffman “did not seek authorization to openly carry handguns in Denver” and that “the Department would have considered any such request.”

Walsh’s response, filed by WilmerHale, says Hoffman “is permitted to open carry under Colorado law” and “has never applied for” a Colorado concealed-carry license, so he has never been denied one. The district attorney adds that his office enforces state law and that “Colorado district attorneys do not enforce municipal ordinances or prosecute municipal code violations,” which puts Denver’s open-carry ban outside his reach.

FPC answered the filings in a Nov. 12 release. “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,” FPC President Brandon Combs said. The group points to its July 2025 summary-judgment win over California’s nonresident carry ban in a separate case, Chris Hoffman v. Bonta, in the Southern District of California.

Under Judge Brimmer’s Oct. 29 minute order, the plaintiffs’ reply is due Nov. 25, 2026, and the defendants’ answer to the amended complaint is due 30 days after the court rules on the injunction. No hearing date appears on the docket as of November 2026.