Jump to content


Photo

Palmer vs DC - WIN! Ban on Carry declared unconstitutional


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
227 replies to this topic

#1 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 16,071 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:13 PM

Victory in Palmer v. D.C.
Posted on July 26, 2014 by alangura

Justice never sleeps…. not even on a Saturday afternoon, when this opinion was just handed down.

In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District.

In 2012, I won Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933 (7th Cir. 2012), which struck down Illinois total ban on the carrying of defensive handguns outside the home. With this decision in Palmer, the nation’s last explicit ban of the right to bear arms has bitten the dust. Obviously, the carrying of handguns for self-defense can be regulated. Exactly how is a topic of severe and serious debate, and courts should enforce constitutional limitations on such regulation should the government opt to regulate. But totally banning a right literally spelled out in the Bill of Rights isn’t going to fly.  My deepest thanks to the Second Amendment Foundation for making this victory possible and to my clients for hanging in there. Congratulations Americans, your capital is not a constitution-free zone.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#2 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 16,071 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:14 PM

Our heartfelt congratulations to Alan Gura and the Second Amendment Foundation!! 


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#3 RoadyRunner

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined: 03-October 12

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:14 PM

Woot! Thanks for the good news!

IC Supporting member
NRA life member
NRA certified Basic Pistol Instructor

Illinois Certified Concealed Carry Instructor

 


#4 RoadyRunner

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined: 03-October 12

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:16 PM

I guess they also have to allow ammo as well..... Wasn't there someone a while ago that got charged with having fired brass in their car?

IC Supporting member
NRA life member
NRA certified Basic Pistol Instructor

Illinois Certified Concealed Carry Instructor

 


#5 blazzinbird

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,013 posts
  • Joined: 22-February 13

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:19 PM

So does this mean DC is going shall issue?

If you like your gun, you can keep it...... But only if you don't vote for Hillary next year.

 

A right delayed is a right denied....


#6 RoadyRunner

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined: 03-October 12

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:20 PM

Some sites are reporting constitutional carry, until a law is put in place to regulate carry. Not sure myself though.

IC Supporting member
NRA life member
NRA certified Basic Pistol Instructor

Illinois Certified Concealed Carry Instructor

 


#7 kwc

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,413 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 13

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:23 PM

Fantastic! And I love this statement: "Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District."
"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up." - Galations 6:9 (NIV)

"If you can't explain it to a six-year old, you don't understand it yourself." - Albert Einstein (paraphrased)

#8 Marie

    Lizzie's Bennet's alter ego

  • Members
  • 4,164 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 12

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:25 PM

Woo hoo! It seems non-residents are allowed to carry, too.


Great Lakes: Unsalted and Shark Free!


#9 Gamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,488 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 13

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:34 PM

icDAk.gif

Now, if he could have just got that non-resident part of the decision included for Illinois...

Edited by Gamma, 26 July 2014 - 03:44 PM.

Illinois' FCCA is a prime example of the maxim that sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

#10 paulgl26

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 749 posts
  • Joined: 10-February 08

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:36 PM

Yes



Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk

Edited by paulgl26, 26 July 2014 - 03:47 PM.

Illinoiscarry,Isra and Nra member

#11 Bud

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,572 posts
  • Joined: 06-August 09

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:37 PM

This is such a HUGE victory

 

May God Bless and Keep Alan Gura!


Bud
 
 
Winter is coming
and the White Walkers are already attacking the cities



ITWT Club Member 001

ONE STATE- ONE LAW

#12 Talonap

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,445 posts
  • Joined: 12-July 08

Posted 26 July 2014 - 03:46 PM

Is it possible for DC to appeal?



#13 Gamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,488 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 13

Posted 26 July 2014 - 04:04 PM

The problem is, they only invalidated the carry provisions. One would still have to comply with all the registration and licensing etc to even possess a firearm or ammo. No non-residents (other than the ROCstars) are likely to be carrying anytime soon, and there are I suspect a vanishingly small number of people who have gone through the wringer to legally own a handgun in DC.
Illinois' FCCA is a prime example of the maxim that sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

#14 Bud

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,572 posts
  • Joined: 06-August 09

Posted 26 July 2014 - 04:22 PM

The problem is, they only invalidated the carry provisions. One would still have to comply with all the registration and licensing etc to even possess a firearm or ammo. No non-residents (other than the ROCstars) are likely to be carrying anytime soon, and there are I suspect a vanishingly small number of people who have gone through the wringer to legally own a handgun in DC.

That was exactly the intent of the lawsuit, to invalidate the unconstitutional ban on carrying a firearm for personal defense.

 

It was a total win.

 

"Always with the negative waves, Moriarty?"

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=Xyh-JpWdGmQ


Bud
 
 
Winter is coming
and the White Walkers are already attacking the cities



ITWT Club Member 001

ONE STATE- ONE LAW

#15 lee n. field

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,990 posts
  • Joined: 14-April 04

Posted 26 July 2014 - 04:33 PM

 

In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional

 

Woo Hoo!

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=rY0WxgSXdEE


Edited by lee n. field, 26 July 2014 - 07:15 PM.

"Woe to you who desire the day of the LORD!
Why would you have the day of the LORD?
It is darkness, and not light,"

#16 Lou

    Resident Old Guy

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 13,570 posts
  • Joined: 18-May 04

Posted 26 July 2014 - 04:36 PM

Another ban bites the dust.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. -  George Orwell

A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again. 


#17 1700715

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 185 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 14

Posted 26 July 2014 - 04:38 PM

God Bless America,  Awesome!!


A government big enough to give you everything you want,

Is strong enough to take everything you have.

                                   -Thomas Jefferson-

 


#18 wtr100

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,402 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 09

Posted 26 July 2014 - 04:46 PM

Some sites are reporting constitutional carry, until a law is put in place to regulate carry. Not sure myself though.

 

 

I would NOT be willing to try that


Have your musket clean as a whistle, hatchet scoured, 60 rounds powder and ball and be ready to march at a minute's warning

ISRA Life Member
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Instructor Rifle, Pistol, Shotgun
NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
ISP Approved Concealed Carry Instructor


#19 wtr100

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,402 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 09

Posted 26 July 2014 - 04:48 PM

Is it possible for DC to appeal?

 

of course but there is a risk if they lose like IL chose not to appeal


Have your musket clean as a whistle, hatchet scoured, 60 rounds powder and ball and be ready to march at a minute's warning

ISRA Life Member
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Instructor Rifle, Pistol, Shotgun
NRA Certified Chief Range Safety Officer
ISP Approved Concealed Carry Instructor


#20 defaultdotxbe

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,284 posts
  • Joined: 17-February 11

Posted 26 July 2014 - 04:51 PM

 

Is it possible for DC to appeal?

 

of course but there is a risk if they lose like IL chose not to appeal

 

Since DC was the last total ban they have nothing left to lose by appealing


"The cheek of every American must tingle with shame as he reads the silly,
flat, and dishwatery utterances of the man who has to be pointed out to
intelligent foreigners as the President of the United States."
-Chicago Times review of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.


#21 bmyers

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 4,086 posts
  • Joined: 31-May 12

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:05 PM

Will this court ruling affect other states and having to issue license/permits to non-residents?

Life Member, Gun Owners of America
Life Member, NRA

ISRA Member


#22 Gamma

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,488 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 13

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:06 PM

Is it possible for DC to appeal?

They won't appeal, they'll just reinstate the technical issuance of carry permits under a "may issue" scheme and then only issue them to VIPs as they see fit. Which will possibly start another round of litigation.

Will this court ruling affect other states and having to issue license/permits to non-residents?

District court orders don't have much weight in establishing precedence.

Edited by Gamma, 26 July 2014 - 05:08 PM.

Illinois' FCCA is a prime example of the maxim that sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.

#23 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 16,071 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:13 PM

Is it possible for DC to appeal?

 

 

Yes.


"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#24 lockman

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,989 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 06

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:18 PM

Fantastic! :)

"We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1776

Life Member NRA, ISRA,  CCRKBA, GOA, & SAF


#25 tkroenlein

    OFFICIAL MEMBER

  • Members
  • 8,841 posts
  • Joined: 12-January 13

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:19 PM

Is it possible for DC to appeal?

They won't appeal, they'll just reinstate the technical issuance of carry permits under a "may issue" scheme and then only issue them to VIPs as they see fit. Which will possibly start another round of litigation.

Will this court ruling affect other states and having to issue license/permits to non-residents?

District court orders don't have much weight in establishing precedence.

Did you read the opinion?

#26 lockman

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,989 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 06

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:30 PM

Nothing would surprise me, but the district court used the Heller & McDonald opinions and very strongly stated you can reach no other conclusion.

"We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1776

Life Member NRA, ISRA,  CCRKBA, GOA, & SAF


#27 Tango7

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,889 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 08

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:36 PM

:)


You will not 'rise to the occasion', you will default to your level of training - plan accordingly.

Despite their rallying around us at election time, honoring only 8 hours of Illinois' 40+ hour law enforcement class towards a 16 hour requirement shows the contempt that our elected officials hold us in.

#28 Chief Illiniwek

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 734 posts
  • Joined: 22-March 13

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:37 PM

Just got home and saw this....excellent news!!


Liberals:  If the shoe doesn't fit, make everyone wear it.  -  Ann Coulter

 

IllinoisCarry Supporting Member

NRA Life Member

ISRA Member


#29 skinnyb82

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,838 posts
  • Joined: 07-November 12

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:44 PM

They'll appeal.  They're too arrogant to not appeal this loss and the odds of them prevailing or coming out on the losing end but having the panel ruling overturned on en banc are too great for the District to not appeal this ruling.  Even if they do enact some draconian may issue scheme, it is still a loss for them at the district level and remember that Lanier is the reason why we have Heller in the first place.  The District might get lucky on appeal by drawing a panel of Dem appointees.  The number of active Circuit Judges for the D.C. Circuit is 7 vs. 4 Republican appointees.  Dem appointed Judges control the Circuit now.  Senior Circuit Judges (Randolph, Silberman, Buckley...who's labeled "inactive" as in he does not hear cases, ever, so don't even count him, Williams, Ginsburg, and Sentelle) sit on panels but are not considered "active."  Lanier will feel empowered by Obama stacking CADC with characters like Judge Millett (former clerk for CA9 Judge Tang, former Assistant SG for Clinton, former appellate staff at DoJ Civil Rights Division), Judge Pillard (former Assistant Counsel for NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Assistant SG for the Clinton Admin, former Professor at Georgetown School of Law), Judge Wilkins (thanks to the Honorable Judge Wilkins, prior to actually becoming a judge, he sued Maryland and we now have the term "driving while black."  Confirmed as district judge in 2010 and in about 2.5 years, elevated to the Circuit by...Obama to replace Judge Sentelle).  You think D.C. is gonna pass up a 47% chance that one Dem appointee will be drawn to sit on the appellate panel, a 22% chance that two Dem appointees will be drawn, and a 10.4% chance that ALL THREE Circuit Judges will be Dem appointees?  I don't.  That takes Senior Judges into account and if none of the Senior Judges sit on the panel, they cannot participate in the en banc rehearing process as per Circuit Rules.  This is EXACTLY what may happen in Halbig v. Sebelius.


NRA Member
SAF Member
C&R License Holder

#30 C0untZer0

    Contributing Member in Arrears

  • Members
  • 13,385 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 11

Posted 26 July 2014 - 06:05 PM

I don't think DC will appeal, I think most of the gun control folks were scared to death that Madigan would appeal Moore/ Shepard - I'm even of the opinion that they asked her not to, because they were afraid of Moore, and Posner's verbiage becoming the law of the land.

 

I think they're just as afraid of Palmer.  Why have the case go any higher with even more potential to hurt the gun control cause?

 

It also seems kind of senseless to appeal - if the court didn't hear Woollard or Kwong, why would they hear Palmer?


Edited by C0untZer0, 26 July 2014 - 06:07 PM.

“Most gun control arguments miss the point. If all control boils fundamentally to force, how can one resist aggression without equal force? How can a truly “free” state exist if the individual citizen is enslaved to the forceful will of individual or organized aggressors?
 
 It cannot.” 

 

― Tiffany Madison―