|
D.C. Circuit Restores Much Gun Control Ability With 'Heller 2'
In a split ruling in an ongoing NRA-supported case challenging the restrictive gun laws established by the Washington D.C. government in defiance of the Supreme Courts 2008 Heller decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has upheld a number of highly restrictive gun laws.Unfortunately, the court ruled that the Districts general handgun registration requirement is constitutional. However, the court reached that conclusion by misreading the Supreme Courts Heller decision as presuming that any type of longstanding restriction is constitutional, so it only upheld the more traditional aspects of the registration system, such as the requirements that the registrant provide his or her name and address, a description of the firearm and certain other basic information. By contrast, the court found that other D.C. requirements, such as fingerprints, a vision requirement, ballistics tests and mandatory training, were novel and therefore need to be reviewed again by a lower court under a tighter standard of scrutiny. Similarly, the court found that long gun registration is novel in the U.S. and returned that issue to the lower court as well. D.C. laws banning assault weapons and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition were also wrongly found to be constitutional. The Supreme Court said in Heller that arms are protected under the Constitution if they are in common use, and the D.C. Circuit found it clear enough in the record that semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than ten rounds are indeed in common use, based on Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives production statistics showing that 1.6 million AR-15s alone have been manufactured since 1986, and that the banned magazines are even more prevalent. But the court also found based largely on the testimony of a Brady Campaign lawyer to the District of Columbia Council that the District ha[d] 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. Fortunately, in a long and well reasoned dissenting opinion that may provide a road map for other courts, Judge Brett Kavanaugh rejected the majoritys reasoning. Rather than the intermediate scrutiny employed by the majority or any other balancing test, Judge Kavanaugh would have applied a standard based on text, history, and tradition. Under that standard, he argued that it would strain logic and common sense to conclude that the Second Amendment protects semi-automatic handguns but does not protect semi-automatic rifles, which have not traditionally been banned and are in common use today. Judge Kavanaugh also would have rejected the entire registration system, arguing that D.C.s type of total gun registration system is not traditional and remains highly unusual today. The NRA strongly disagrees with the outcome, and is reviewing the decision and considering all options. Posted by: Anonymoose 2011-10-22 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=332134 |