Jump to content

Heller2 decision


Tvandermyde

Recommended Posts

Aside from the "good stuff" in the dissent, I'll be interested to hear opinions on what good stuff is in the majority decision.

 

Mainly, what I see is that:

 

- Basic handgun registration requirements are constitutional under intermediate scrutiny.

 

- "Novel" or more "advanced" handgun registration requirements may or may not be constitutional under intermediate scrutiny, and are remanded down so that DC can provide evidence that their requirements closely serve a compelling governmental interest.

 

- Bans on so-called "assault weapons" and "large capacity mags" are constitutional under intermediate scrutiny.

 

 

I strongly suspect that the Brady Campaign will soon issue a glowing and celebratory press release.

 

Note that this is a 3-judge panel on the DC circuit court of appeals. I suppose it's possible to request an en banc hearing (before the full court). The dissenting judge (as far as I can see) opined that registration requirements and semiauto bans are unconstitutional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/04/usa-guns-ban-idUSN1E7930JG20111004

 

US appeals court upholds DC semi-automatic rifle ban

WASHINGTON | Tue Oct 4, 2011 10:47am EDT

 

Oct 4 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday upheld a District of Columbia law that bans semi-automatic rifles and large-capacity magazines in Washington, finding that the restrictions were constitutional.

 

The ruling upheld a lower court decision that found the ban did not implicate the core rights under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment that permits individuals to possess firearms.

 

The U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 in favor of the city's ban.

 

"The District has carried its burden of showing a substantial relationship between the prohibition of both semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than ten rounds and the objectives of protecting police officers and controlling crime," said the majority opinion.

 

It was written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg and he was joined by Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson. Judge Brett Kavanaugh dissented, saying he would have struck down the weapons ban as unconstitutional.

 

The two judges who upheld the ban also backed some registration requirements under D.C. law but sent some back to the district court for further proceedings.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 issued a landmark ruling that the constitutional right to keep and bear arms applies to individuals and allows them to use guns for lawful purposes such as self-defense in the home.

 

The Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that gun rights applied not just to federal laws, but to state and city laws as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imho, I don't see a whole lot of positive here just quickly scanning the 97 pages? What am I missing?

 

This is turning out to be a pretty bad last couple of weeks it seems.

I don't think you missed anything. The bad things in this decision far outweigh any of the "good". NOT good for us at all. Of course someone will come up with a "silver lining" scenario. Interpret it however you want, but there's no way to realistically say that it helps our cause in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sad part here is that congress has full oversight of all of DC's laws, therefore; you would think that the federal reps from 40+ pro gun states could muster a vote to restire sanity to DC's gun laws.

 

Based solely on the level of scrutiny applied the court does not believe it to be a fundamental right. So this case drags another year or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sad part here is that congress has full oversight of all of DC's laws, therefore; you would think that the federal reps from 40+ pro gun states could muster a vote to restire sanity to DC's gun laws.

 

The sad part? That's the happy part. All the legislature has to do is overturn these DC gun restrictions ... and the NRA has been working on getting that done for years. This ruling might actually motivate them to get it done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from the "good stuff" in the dissent, I'll be interested to hear opinions on what good stuff is in the majority decision.

 

Mainly, what I see is that:

 

- Basic handgun registration requirements are constitutional under intermediate scrutiny.

 

- "Novel" or more "advanced" handgun registration requirements may or may not be constitutional under intermediate scrutiny, and are remanded down so that DC can provide evidence that their requirements closely serve a compelling governmental interest.

 

- Bans on so-called "assault weapons" and "large capacity mags" are constitutional under intermediate scrutiny.

 

 

I strongly suspect that the Brady Campaign will soon issue a glowing and celebratory press release.

 

Note that this is a 3-judge panel on the DC circuit court of appeals. I suppose it's possible to request an en banc hearing (before the full court). The dissenting judge (as far as I can see) opined that registration requirements and semiauto bans are unconstitutional.

 

I haven't had a chance to read this yet, but I hope that a higher court (Circuit Court en banc, SCOTUS) rules that their application of intermediate scrutiny was incorrect.

 

-- Frank

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Heller decision. My guess is it gets overturned if it goes to the en banc level unless they have a burning desire to get b!tch slapped by the SCOTUS like the 7th did in McDonald.

 

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous,

that only those arms in existence in the 18th century

are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret

constitutional rights that way. Just as the First

Amendment protects modern forms of communications,

e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844,

849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern

forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27,

35–36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima

facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms,

even those that were not in existence at the time of the

founding

.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of this stuff really matters except at appeals courts and SCOTUS anyway. Losing cases along the way gives us chances to get there. Losing many cases along the way gives us many chances to get there. It is almost better to lose at the lower court level.

 

Yeah, except this decision (Heller 2) came out of the DC Circuit court of appeals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I finally read through all 97 pages of this decision, and something jumped out at me:

 

In sum, the basic requirement to register a handgun is longstanding in American law, accepted for a century in diverse states and cities, and now applicable to more than one fourth of the Nation by population.

 

Couldn't the same be said of Right-To-Carry?

 

In sum, the basic RIGHT to CARRY a handgun is longstanding in American law, accepted for TWO CENTURIES in NEARLY EVERY state and city, and now applicable to more than NINE-TENTHS of the Nation by population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of this stuff really matters except at appeals courts and SCOTUS anyway. Losing cases along the way gives us chances to get there. Losing many cases along the way gives us many chances to get there. It is almost better to lose at the lower court level.

 

Yeah, except this decision (Heller 2) came out of the DC Circuit court of appeals.

 

SCOTUS, here we come!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of this stuff really matters except at appeals courts and SCOTUS anyway. Losing cases along the way gives us chances to get there. Losing many cases along the way gives us many chances to get there. It is almost better to lose at the lower court level.

 

Yeah, except this decision (Heller 2) came out of the DC Circuit court of appeals.

 

SCOTUS, here we come!!!

 

think they will here this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of this stuff really matters except at appeals courts and SCOTUS anyway. Losing cases along the way gives us chances to get there. Losing many cases along the way gives us many chances to get there. It is almost better to lose at the lower court level.

 

Yeah, except this decision (Heller 2) came out of the DC Circuit court of appeals.

 

SCOTUS, here we come!!!

 

think they will here this?

 

I hope not. I think our other cases will be better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brady bunch screaming sweet victory

 

D. C. Appeals Court Agrees with Brady Center That There Is No Right to Assault Weapons or Clips, Gun Registration Is Constitutional

Heller’s attack on strong gun laws fails, in large part because of Brady Center testimony

Oct 4, 2011

 

Washington, DC - Statement of Brady Center Acting President Dennis Henigan on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruling today in Heller v. District of Columbia:

 

“Today’s ruling refusing to strike down any of Washington, D.C.’s strong gun laws is a decisive blow to the gun lobby’s extremist claims that there is a right to be armed with AK-47s and large-capacity assault clips.

 

“This is the same court that struck down D.C.’s handgun ban and laid the foundation for an individual right to a gun in the home for self-defense in the original case brought by Dick Heller. Afterwards, D.C. enacted among the strongest gun laws in the country. Of hundreds of legal challenges to gun laws brought since Heller, this one represented the broadest single attack on a set of gun laws. The D.C. Circuit relied heavily on evidence submitted by the Brady Center on the dangers of assault weapons and assault clips to reach its decision. The same court that originally struck down the D.C. handgun ban has now affirmed that strong gun laws are entirely consistent with the Second Amendment.”

 

“The court recognized that gun registration is constitutional and thoroughly rejected gun lobby claims that there is a constitutional right to be armed with semi-automatic assault weapons. We are confident that the trial court will uphold all of D.C.’s other strong gun laws, such as limits on bulk sales of handguns and rifle registration, after the facts are more fully developed in court.”

 

The Brady Center’s Legal Action Project report, Hollow Victory, comprehensively analyzes the more than 400 challenges to gun laws filed by the gun lobby and gun criminals in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings in D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, and finds that the courts have overwhelmingly rejected these challenges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...