DC CIRCUIT COURT STRIKES DOWN GUN LAW ON 2A GROUNDS
- Thread starter balletto
- Start date
- Status
How about the mother of all conspiracy theories.
During the coctail parties the supremes and the fourth circuit decide to do this. They have a perfect vehicle in the DC gun ban. They make sure the majority opinion is properly worded. When it gets to SCOTUS they affirm the circuit and throw Miller out also. State shall not be infringed means exactly that. BATFE would become BATE.
Could be that all the states that have passed CCW laws in recent years made a difference. No blood in the streets foolishness. Time will tell if common sense has broken out.
During the coctail parties the supremes and the fourth circuit decide to do this. They have a perfect vehicle in the DC gun ban. They make sure the majority opinion is properly worded. When it gets to SCOTUS they affirm the circuit and throw Miller out also. State shall not be infringed means exactly that. BATFE would become BATE.
Could be that all the states that have passed CCW laws in recent years made a difference. No blood in the streets foolishness. Time will tell if common sense has broken out.
RNB65
Member
That certainly could happen. Anytime you appeal a lower court's ruling, there's always a good chance that the appeal court will rule against you. But the 2A is pretty straight forward and I can't imagine a fairly conservative SCOTUS destroying it with the military/militia argument. But stranger things have happened...
lacoochee
Member
Also it would not matter if they do decide against us now as opposed to later when an outright ban is proposed. It is better right now that we get this settled while we are still in a relative position of strength.
Dan from MI
Member
That is one of the best legal opinions I've ever read. Judge Silberman (Reagan appointee) and Judge Griffith (GWB) get a major thumbs up from me.
Great combination of case law precident, facts, history, treatises, and statute. Better than even the first Emerson ruling.
Great combination of case law precident, facts, history, treatises, and statute. Better than even the first Emerson ruling.
pangris
Member
"as a lawyer" you should know en banc leaves it alone 99% of the time.
SC deny cert > win
SC acknowledges the majority opinion > the final win
Cosmoline
Member
Overuling en banc is possible, but as you note quite rare in average cases. I find it doubtful that the majority went to the time and trouble of writing such a detailed opinion without some understanding that they were not too far afield of the rest of the circuit. En banc is supposed to be used to resolve intra-circuit splits of authority between panels. That said, the DC circuit had a somewhat controversial history of using en banc reviews in the 80's to bring liberal panels in check. The criticism over intra-circuit turmoil has I believe led them to cooperate more behind the scenes.
However, there is another possibility. The majority here may ALREADY KNOW that they're going to get reversed en banc, but they really put the energy into crafting a decision in order to set the stage for the SCT to reverse the en ban reversal. In effect, their decision is arguing the case to the Supreme Court. One never knows what those judges are up to behind the scenes.
However, there is another possibility. The majority here may ALREADY KNOW that they're going to get reversed en banc, but they really put the energy into crafting a decision in order to set the stage for the SCT to reverse the en ban reversal. In effect, their decision is arguing the case to the Supreme Court. One never knows what those judges are up to behind the scenes.
For anyone fearing a reversal by the Supreme Court, would that put us in a worse position that we were in last week?
Before this Appeals Court ruling, the only protection we had was our ability to persuade elected officials to not pass anti laws. The 2nd amendment, having not been enforced before today did us little good.
At least going all the way to the Supreme Court we have a chance of getting the protection of the 2nd amendment established. What good will having inconsistent decisions at the Appeals Court level? Some of us would have 2nd amendment protection and some would not.
It seems to me a good risk/reward set up to get before the Supreme Court.
Before this Appeals Court ruling, the only protection we had was our ability to persuade elected officials to not pass anti laws. The 2nd amendment, having not been enforced before today did us little good.
At least going all the way to the Supreme Court we have a chance of getting the protection of the 2nd amendment established. What good will having inconsistent decisions at the Appeals Court level? Some of us would have 2nd amendment protection and some would not.
It seems to me a good risk/reward set up to get before the Supreme Court.
RNB65
Member
It depends on their reason for reversing it. SCOTUS has refused fo take a stand on the 2A for decades. If they were to reverse this decision on the grounds that the court erred in taking away DC's right to ban gun ownership, then we're in no worse position than last week. But if they take a larger view and declare that the 2A is not an individual right and only applies to government organized militias, it would be a huge (perhaps fatal) setback to 2A rights. There's a wide range of rulings that SCOTUS could make in this case, some very good and some really, really bad. Most likely they would go for the middle ground (if they agree to hear the case at all).
Waitone
Member
Want more good news?????
The DC court is considered the primary farm team for SCOTUS.
The DC court is considered the primary farm team for SCOTUS.
Fletchette
Member
Oh yeah! Bring it on!
I want to see a conclusion to this whole "gun control" abomination within my life time. Preferrable while I am still young enough to act if necessary...
I don't want to die not knowing if this great country is destined to fall into tyranny due to the disarming of the citizenry. It is sort of like those poor souls who died during Pearl Harbor; they never knew if we survived or if Japan and Germany conquered the world...or perhaps those Americans who lived in the 18th century and knew slavery was an abomination to liberty, but died while it was still practiced. I want to see a conclusion!
tenbase
Member
Well said, sir. Your ideas intrigue me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
kd7nqb
Member
THIS IS A MAJOR STEP, THE SUPREME COURT IS THE PERFECT PLACE FOR THIS TO GO AND NOW IS THE PERFECT TIME. We finally have conservative and fair judges.
Fletchette
Member
My letter to my Senator:
Randi,
Could you please let Senator Enzi know that I am very, VERY happy that the Washington DC handgun ban has been overturned today (actually yesterday) by the DC Circuit Court. I know that the Senator had sponsored a bill to overturn the ban, and that this ruling has the same effect, so I am sure that he is pleased as well. Please let him know that I fully agree with his efforts to support the Second Amendment and encourage him to put forth additional legislation to further allow citizens to exercise their rights. I would suggest a bill to repeal existing restrictions on the importation of certain military firearms or a bill restricting the BATFE from being able to arbitrarily “reinterpret” existing laws to create additional gun control. It is prudent to take the initiative and “strike while the iron is still hot.”
If there is anything I can do to help please let me know. I would be glad to volunteer on his behalf in support of this issue.
Sincerely,
***Fletchette***
Randi,
Could you please let Senator Enzi know that I am very, VERY happy that the Washington DC handgun ban has been overturned today (actually yesterday) by the DC Circuit Court. I know that the Senator had sponsored a bill to overturn the ban, and that this ruling has the same effect, so I am sure that he is pleased as well. Please let him know that I fully agree with his efforts to support the Second Amendment and encourage him to put forth additional legislation to further allow citizens to exercise their rights. I would suggest a bill to repeal existing restrictions on the importation of certain military firearms or a bill restricting the BATFE from being able to arbitrarily “reinterpret” existing laws to create additional gun control. It is prudent to take the initiative and “strike while the iron is still hot.”
If there is anything I can do to help please let me know. I would be glad to volunteer on his behalf in support of this issue.
Sincerely,
***Fletchette***
gego asks,
I find some supreme irony here in that this decision comes out of the District of Columbia circuit, DC consistently having the leading firearms death rate per 100,000 by state, at the same time as it has its stringent gun laws. The Supremes work in DC, as do the other judges on the DC Circuit Court, although I would suspect that few if any of them live in DC, so this is close to home for them. This has be be in the back of their minds, no matter how dimly.
Jim
The good, or bad, depending on how you look at it, of inconsistent decisions by the courts of appeals, is that this makes it more likely that the Supreme Court will grant cert to reconcile the decisions of the lower courts. The Supremes have a long history of letting serious issues simmer for a while as the courts of appeal have their say here and there before they step in.
I find some supreme irony here in that this decision comes out of the District of Columbia circuit, DC consistently having the leading firearms death rate per 100,000 by state, at the same time as it has its stringent gun laws. The Supremes work in DC, as do the other judges on the DC Circuit Court, although I would suspect that few if any of them live in DC, so this is close to home for them. This has be be in the back of their minds, no matter how dimly.
Jim
Mongo the Mutterer
Member
Again guys, if you haven't read this work of art http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf
Whooo Hah!!! Take that you nuancing, gun grabbing, moon bat, socialist, communist, liberal hippies!!!!
This is what "IS" IS !!!!!
I wonder what our old pal Mayor Bloomers is thinking this morning as he pops his poached egg? "Maybe I have find another issue to demonize??? Maybe if I put the criminals in JAIL there would be less gun violence??"
Enjoy your breakfast, Mr. Mayor. I hope your valet spit in your Cheerios!!!!
Whooo Hah!!! Take that you nuancing, gun grabbing, moon bat, socialist, communist, liberal hippies!!!!
This is what "IS" IS !!!!!
I wonder what our old pal Mayor Bloomers is thinking this morning as he pops his poached egg? "Maybe I have find another issue to demonize??? Maybe if I put the criminals in JAIL there would be less gun violence??"
Enjoy your breakfast, Mr. Mayor. I hope your valet spit in your Cheerios!!!!
armoredman
Member
Ditto - has there been a stay of execution issued, or some "grace period" where the law is phased out, or some garbage likethat? Or, if someone is arrested last night for an "illegal" firearm just get rich?
JJLINDENVA says,
I say "unhelpful" since there is no doubt that rational persons may agree with this statement, and nothing could be more effective in generating public dismay. We must never trap ourselves by thinking that the Supreme Court is not a political animal.
It does not add to our legal discussion to go on to call Circuit Judge Henderson a "feminazi." In arguing that DC is not a state within the meaning of the Second Amendment, Judge Henderson simply punted, as the Supreme Court itself has so often done when faced with a difficult decision.
I would anticipate the next step in this case will be a motion to stay the decision pending action en banc and/or in the Supreme Court, and that the motion will be granted. Can anyone imagine the Congress at this moment in time trying to cope with this situation in DC, drafting legislation to deal with it, when most of its members are running for president?
With respect,
Jim
With respect, I consider this to be some more unrestrained, unjustified and unhelpful glee. We'll see -- perhaps. But -- if this decision does not survive we will not see. If it does survive and go national the new game will only just have started, as the legislative and executive branches, state and federal, experiment with its acceptable limitations and the respective judicial branches play armchair quarterback. Just look at how many years this "game" has gone on with respect to other things in the Bill of Rights.
I say "unhelpful" since there is no doubt that rational persons may agree with this statement, and nothing could be more effective in generating public dismay. We must never trap ourselves by thinking that the Supreme Court is not a political animal.
It does not add to our legal discussion to go on to call Circuit Judge Henderson a "feminazi." In arguing that DC is not a state within the meaning of the Second Amendment, Judge Henderson simply punted, as the Supreme Court itself has so often done when faced with a difficult decision.
I would anticipate the next step in this case will be a motion to stay the decision pending action en banc and/or in the Supreme Court, and that the motion will be granted. Can anyone imagine the Congress at this moment in time trying to cope with this situation in DC, drafting legislation to deal with it, when most of its members are running for president?
With respect,
Jim
Rumble
Member
As far as I can tell, DC gun owners -- or rather, gun-want-to-owners -- are in a bind still. The ruling, may it grow and prosper a millionfold, is a major breakthrough on the issue of right. However, since there are no gun stores in DC, as I understand it, DC citizens have no legal avenue to obtain a gun--even if they have the right to own said notional guns. They'd have to break other laws, or move out, and then move back, or something equally tortuous.
Bartholomew Roberts
Member
DC will ask for a stay until the issue can be brought up to the en banc court and the stay will almost certainly be granted. If the en banc opinions, they will ask to renew the stay of execution until SCOTUS hears it and that too will be granted.
lacoochee
Member
But today, tomorrow and the day after that and so on some folks will move into DC, those people can take their guns out of their parents attics and take them with them. So by this time next week there will/could be literally hundreds more gun owners living in the District.
Heck, if you are living in NOVA and your lease just ended, maybe a nice apartment in Georgetown might look more acceptable since it would be like buying a guaranteed lottery ticket once you move in and inform on yourself*.
The conversation might go like this,
911 Op: How may I assist you?...
Caller: There is a dangerous automatic assault machine pistol at 9999 Georgetown Way
911 Op: Sir, I show you as calling from that location.
Caller: I know, please hurry, I think I just saw it twitch.
*Assuming court ruling not stayed of course.
Heck, if you are living in NOVA and your lease just ended, maybe a nice apartment in Georgetown might look more acceptable since it would be like buying a guaranteed lottery ticket once you move in and inform on yourself*.
The conversation might go like this,
911 Op: How may I assist you?...
Caller: There is a dangerous automatic assault machine pistol at 9999 Georgetown Way
911 Op: Sir, I show you as calling from that location.
Caller: I know, please hurry, I think I just saw it twitch.
*Assuming court ruling not stayed of course.
Mr.V.
Member
Rumble said:
Rumble, I think you're absolutely right. I wonder if they'll simply "Jim Crow" their way out of ever having to put a gun in the hands of a law abiding citizen in exchange for a few bills.
You'll probably see a $900 telecommunications fee attached to each Glock...
lacoochee
Member
If the 2A is actually determined by SCOTUS to be a civil right, then the right to bear arms and anything infringing on that right would be subject to strict scrutiny. So Jim Crow gun laws (very appropriate given that were talking about DC, thinking about who has been disarmed there) would be struck down by the courts almost immediately.
- Status
