Page:Spencer v. Nigrelli.pdf/29

 irreparable harm.” A.H. by & through Hester v. French, 985 F.3d 165, 184 (2d Cir. 2021).

Here, absent a preliminary injunction, Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights are being violated. They are forced to give up their Second Amendment right to armed self-defense outside the home. The “right to bear arms enables one to possess not only the means to defend oneself but also the self-confidence—and psychic comfort—that comes with knowing one could protect oneself if necessary.” Grace v. D.C., 187 F. Supp. 3d 124, 150 (D.D.C. 2016). One cannot regain that peace of mind or readiness after the fact. See Heller, 554 U.S. at 595 (noting that the Second Amendment permits an individual to protect himself when “the intervention of society” on his behalf “may be too late to prevent an injury”). Indeed, the “Second Amendment protects … intangible and unquantifiable interests.” Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684, 698 (7th Cir, 2011). Infringements “of this right cannot be compensated by damages.” Id. See also Antonyuk, 2022 WL 3999791, at *36 (concluding that the plaintiff has “shown the adverse factual consequences” that he will suffer if an injunction is not issued, namely, “diminished safety in all the locations that he currently carries his concealed handgun that he will not be able to carry it”).

Further, the Supreme Court has held that the loss of “First Amendment freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury.” ''Roman Cath. Diocese of Brooklyn'', 141 S.Ct. at 67 (quoting Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 378 (1976)) (emphasis added). See also A.H. by & through Hester, 985