Have any Federal laws fallen since Heller?

[bushmaster1313]

Anyone aware of any Federal gun laws ruled unconstitutional since Heller?

 

[cbrgator]

I don't think any have been challenged except for DC's restrictions, which were upheld at the District level.

The federal laws are not really all that cumbersome in the grand scheme of things. It's the state laws where the real restrictive legislation has been enacted.

 

[alsaqr]

No federal laws have fallen as a result of Heller. No federal laws will be found unconstitutional as a result of Heller.

 

[gbran]

Better Question

What federal laws could or should be challenged based on the Heller ruling?

Which are the most egregious?

 

[ArmedBear]

I'm going to hazard a guess that there are Federal laws that won't happen because of Heller, though.

 

[TexasRifleman]

What federal laws could or should be challenged based on the Heller ruling?

Hughes. It's arbitrary nature seems to be an open door.

A machinegun made in 1984 is perfectly legal to be sold but the exact same gun made in 1987 is not?

NFA itself probably can't be challenged on Heller but Hughes is just wacky if you think about it. Something made illegal solely because of it's date of manufacture....craziness.

 

[Sebastian the Ibis]

A machinegun made in 1984 is perfectly legal to be sold but the exact same gun made in 1987 is not?

In 1986, a machine gun made in 87 or after would not involve a taking. The government doesn't want to have to pay for all the guns they ban after all.

 

[Sam Adams]

Hughes. It's arbitrary nature seems to be an open door.

A machinegun made in 1984 is perfectly legal to be sold but the exact same gun made in 1987 is not?

NFA itself probably can't be challenged on Heller but Hughes is just wacky if you think about it. Something made illegal solely because of it's date of manufacture....craziness.

I quite agree. The Hughes (may that SOB rot in Hell) amendment to FOPA (Title 18, Section 922(o) of the US Code) bans an entire class of weapons (post-5/18/86 full autos) for civilian ownership. These are not inherently dangerous weapons, not when a functionally-identical weapon manufactured a day before the ban can and is owned quite legally, and not when it has been documented that there is literally 1 (ONE) case of a legally-owned full auto having been utilized in a crime since the NFA instituted the tax stamp requirement (and that by an off-duty police officer). There is simply no rational basis to uphold this travesty of a law...and while the Supremes didn't say what the standard of review would be in either Heller or McDonald, not one single observer believes that it will ultimately be the "Rational Basis" (i.e. the lowest standard of review, based on which exactly zero laws have been overturned).

Further, 922(o) could possibly be used to overturn the tax stamp requirements for full autos. How/Why? Because it prevents the collection of the tax necessary to obtain the tax stamp. The entire NFA was defended as being Constitutional because it explicitly wasn't a gun ban, but rather a tax-raising measure (though a $200 tax in the middle of the Great Depression would be equivalent to a tax in excess of $5,000 today, clearly something punitive or effectively prohibitionary in nature). So, no tax means that the NFA IS a gun ban.

I want this POS law overturned, I want 5 million drop-in happy switches sold in a few years' time and several million select-fire weapons sold in the same time frame - I want a situation to arise FAST in which it will become utterly impossible for any government, or any combination of police, paramilitary, armed forces or invading armies to disarm the populace and to control this nation.

I would welcome any comments as to the probability of the legal arguments presented above being successfully argued in front of the current USSC (forget whether such a case will actually be brought - that's another matter).

 

[everallm]

The one that is ripe for challenge immediately is the Lautenberg Amendment

The one that is probably easily challengeable is the "Sporting Use" restriction that the ATF uses on importable firearms

Hughes, not gonna happen for a long time.

 

[mack]

Lautenburg - possible
ATF - sporting use - don't know since it does deal with trade and commercial regulation and not just guns or personal ownership at least directly
Hughes - I wish
Perhaps Hughes or some of the NFA down the road (sound surpresors maybe, short barrelled rifles and such maybe, law enforcement sign off maybe)- though that is a real long shot - machine guns nope - at least through the courts - those can only be changed through legislation.
FFLs - nope
Background checks - nope

Really, I think as Gura has stated - that the low hanging fruit - the cases that are easiet to argue and to win are almost all state laws - may issue - bans on all carry - only discretionary carry laws - rosters or lists of approved guns or assault weapon bans - these are the laws that will be attacked first.