Denied Over the State on His Driver’s License: NRA Sues Denver, Says Visitors Have No Legal Way to Carry a Gun There

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

DENVER, CO — The National Rifle Association and two gun owners from other states sued Denver and the state of Colorado on August 12, 2026. Their claim is short and blunt. If you live somewhere else and you come to Denver, there is no legal way to carry a handgun to protect yourself. Not hidden under a jacket, not out in the open. The case was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.

The two men suing are Greg Howeth of Maui County, Hawaii, and Zackary Dougherty of Greenville County, South Carolina. The NRA joined the case for its members who live outside Colorado and say they would carry in Denver if they were allowed to. The suit targets two Colorado laws, Colorado Revised Statutes 18-12-203 and 18-12-213, and part of Denver’s own city code, section 38-117. The people named as defendants are the City and County of Denver, public safety director Al Gardner, police chief Ron Thomas, city attorney Miko Brown, Sheriff Elias Diggins, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, and state public safety director Stan Hilkey. They are sued because of the jobs they hold, not for anything they did personally.

Two rules stack on top of each other here. States handle out-of-state carry permits in two ways. Some states sign agreements with each other. Others skip the agreement and simply decide on their own to honor permits issued elsewhere. Colorado does not accept the permits these men carry. That closes the concealed door. Then Denver’s city code bans carrying a gun openly, which closes the other one. My reciprocity maps show which states honor which permits.

Howeth’s part of the case is worth walking through. The complaint says he is a U.S. citizen, over 21, with no criminal record and no mental health history that would bar him from owning a gun. He holds a Utah permit. He owns a second home in Weld County, Colorado. He took the training Colorado requires and got a certificate from an approved instructor saying he passed. He applied to the Weld County Sheriff’s Department on or about May 26, 2026.

Two days later he got a phone call from the woman who handles permits for the county, then an email. He was denied. The reason given, according to the complaint, was that he does not have a Colorado ID.

Training finished. Certificate in hand. Clean record. A house in the county. Denied over the state printed on his license.

The complaint says he carries legally at home in Hawaii and in the more than 30 states that honor his Utah permit, and that he carries openly in parts of Colorado outside Denver where that is allowed. It also says the Hawaii permit he already holds took a tougher background check, more mental health screening, more class time, and a live-fire test at least as hard as Colorado’s. He flies into Denver International Airport to see family and to get to his second home, and he stops in the city to eat, shop, and run errands.

Dougherty never even got a denial. On April 19, 2026, he tried to apply through the Denver Police Department’s online permit form. The complaint says the form would not let him hit submit, because he is not a Colorado resident. He lived in Loveland until August 2025, his employer is still there, and he has friends in Denver. He carries legally in South Carolina, trains with his handgun, and shoots in competitions.

Most of the complaint is history, and it cuts the opposite way from what you might expect. The plaintiffs list dozens of old laws, some from the 1600s and 1800s, that restricted carrying weapons but let travelers carry anyway. An 1813 Kentucky law exempted anyone “travelling on a journey.” City rules in Dallas, San Antonio, San Francisco, Memphis, Indianapolis, and Boise did the same thing. Arkansas courts explained why: a traveler faces dangers on the road that a man does not face among his own neighbors, so he gets to be armed. The point the plaintiffs are making is that visitors used to get more protection, not none.

The complaint also points to recent rulings. Judges in California and New York have struck down limits on carry by out-of-state visitors. A federal court blocked Hawaii’s version by agreement of both sides. Massachusetts’ highest court threw out the part of that state’s permit system that let an official deny a nonresident a permit at his own discretion, even when the applicant was otherwise qualified and law-abiding. And a court in Washington, D.C., held that people who live elsewhere still have Second Amendment rights when they are there. The plaintiffs quote a line from this year’s Supreme Court decision in Wolford v. Lopez: “the Second Amendment has the same meaning in all parts of the United States.”

What they want from the court is a ruling that these laws, working together, violate the Second Amendment, and an order telling Denver and the state to stop enforcing them that way. They are asking for that on behalf of every out-of-state visitor in the same spot, not just the two of them. They also ask for damages and attorney fees. Their lawyers are Matthew Larosiere and Alan Beck.

More from USA Carry:

None of this has been decided. These are claims in a lawsuit. Denver and the state have not filed a response, no judge has ruled, and the way the complaint describes these laws is the plaintiffs’ description of them.

What stands out to me is how ordinary these two men are. One owns a home in the state and did the training the state asks for. The other lived in Colorado a year ago and still works for a Colorado employer. Part of a serious carry mindset is knowing the rules everywhere you go, and if the complaint is right about Denver, the rule there is that a trained, screened, law-abiding American crosses the city line and has no lawful way to defend himself.