Holyoke’s Chief Called Him Unsuitable Over Charges That Never Produced a Conviction

The Second Amendment Foundation and partners filed an amicus brief in Pratt v. Westbrook at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The caption is David Pratt, Chief of the Holyoke Police Department, as Licensing Authority, v. Randy Westbrook, No. SJC-13822, on appeal from Hampden County Superior Court. SAF’s September 2, 2026 release, and the brief itself, name co-amici: California Rifle & Pistol Association, Second Amendment Law Center, Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Local counsel is Jason A. Guida. SAF counsel is Konstadinos T. Moros.

Holyoke Police Chief David Pratt denied Westbrook a license to carry based on charges from more than a decade earlier that never resulted in a conviction. Massachusetts statutes let a licensing authority refuse a carry license on a subjective finding that an applicant is “unsuitable” or “may create a risk to public safety.” SAF’s brief says that is exactly the “appraisal of facts, exercise of judgment, and formation of an opinion” Bruen footnote 9 held incompatible with a shall-issue regime. Moros, SAF Director of Legal Research and Education: “A licensing official may check objective, ministerial criteria – prohibited-person status, completed training and the like. What the official may not do is decide whether an applicant ‘may’ pose a risk based on old, unproven allegations.”

The Foundation also cites United States v. Rahimi and United States v. Hemani: any disarmament of a person who has not been convicted must be temporary and tied to current dangerousness. Massachusetts’ suitability clause has neither limit. This is not a SCOTUS merits fight. It is a state high court being asked to enforce Bruen in a police chief’s office. The amicus is the filing. The SJC has not decided the case.