Hanson v. District of Columbia - Magazine capacity & Common use

[mab22]

Did we miss this?
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/24a714.html

 

According to the article.

The petition in Hanson v. District of Columbia was docketed, or officially accepted for filing, by the court on Feb. 28. The respondent, the District of Columbia, was directed to file a response by March 31.
 

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/24/24-936/348728/20250226130158817_Final Hanson Petition.pdf

QUESTION PRESENTED
This Court in District of Columbia v. Heller “found it ‘fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons”’ that the Second Amendment protects the possession and use of weapons that are ‘in common use at the time.’” N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol a**’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1, 21 (2022) (quoting District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 627 (2008)).
In this case, a divided D.C. Circuit panel held that magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition are arms “in common use” for lawful purposes, but it nonetheless concluded that the District may categorically ban them because they are “particularly dangerous,” analogous to Bowie knives and fully automatic machine guns.
Accordingly, the question presented is:
Whether the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution allows a categorical ban on arms that are indisputably common throughout the United States and overwhelming used for lawful purposes (generally) and self-defense (specifically).

 

[Euler]

Hanson v DC - Magazine ban