Langenator
Member
A hypothetical here, that I started thinking about as a result of this thread .
Since the 2A has not been applied to the states via the 14A in the manner of the rest of the BoR, despite what research suggests was the intent of the Congress that wrote it, what would be an ideal hypothetical case (with a hypothetical SCOTUS that is capable of reading the Constitution, precedent, and the debates on the 2nd and 14th Amendments)?
My idealized case would be this: a member of the military (active duty) who owns one or more firearms that are legal in other states but are banned in another (ie, CA). All of these firearms purchased legally, while the servicemember was stationed in locations where said firearms are legal. Servicemember is then ordered to a duty station in a state, like CA, where one or more of his firearms are outlawed. File suit based on two areas: (1) 2A guarantees the right of individuals to own firearms, and (2) the state's laws violate the equal protection guarantees of the 14A.
I chose a member of the military as my ideal plaintiff because, unlike civilian citizens, servicemembers have no choice in where they live, thus denying the state the ability to use the "he chose to come here, knowing full well what our laws are" line of reasoning. It's also a personal thing, since I am in the Army and do own a couple or weapons that are considered naughty in the PRK.
Since the 2A has not been applied to the states via the 14A in the manner of the rest of the BoR, despite what research suggests was the intent of the Congress that wrote it, what would be an ideal hypothetical case (with a hypothetical SCOTUS that is capable of reading the Constitution, precedent, and the debates on the 2nd and 14th Amendments)?
My idealized case would be this: a member of the military (active duty) who owns one or more firearms that are legal in other states but are banned in another (ie, CA). All of these firearms purchased legally, while the servicemember was stationed in locations where said firearms are legal. Servicemember is then ordered to a duty station in a state, like CA, where one or more of his firearms are outlawed. File suit based on two areas: (1) 2A guarantees the right of individuals to own firearms, and (2) the state's laws violate the equal protection guarantees of the 14A.
I chose a member of the military as my ideal plaintiff because, unlike civilian citizens, servicemembers have no choice in where they live, thus denying the state the ability to use the "he chose to come here, knowing full well what our laws are" line of reasoning. It's also a personal thing, since I am in the Army and do own a couple or weapons that are considered naughty in the PRK.
.