This is a discussion on Vindicating the Second Amendment: A Pioneering CA Gun Rights Case Comes to a Close within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Damon W. Root | June 2, 2012 My Comments: A substantial partial victory, but much better than it was. Keeping the 2A strong is fundamentally ...
Damon W. Root | June 2, 2012
My Comments: A substantial partial victory, but much better than it was. Keeping the 2A strong is fundamentally about every small and large successive legal wins (legal fights we should not have to engage in at all...), across all States and US Territories.
The final chapter of a trailblazing Second Amendment lawsuit appears to have been written. Yesterday a full panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issued its decision in Nordyke v. King, upholding an Alameda County, California gun control ordinance regulating gun shows at the county fairgrounds. The case first originated more than a decade ago when gun show promoters Russell and Sallie Nordyke filed a Second Amendment challenge against the county’s 1999 ban on the possession of firearms on county-owned property, a law enacted primarily to prevent any guns from being sold at the fairgrounds. The Nordykes’ suit didn’t really pick up steam until 2008, however, when the U.S. Supreme issued its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which struck down Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban and ruled definitively that the Second Amendment secures an individual right, not a collective one, to keep and bear arms.
One issue Heller did not address was whether the Second Amendment also applied to state and local governments. In April 2009, a 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit pushed that issue into the spotlight with a decision in the Nordyke’s case. Although the 9th Circuit voted to uphold the Alameda County gun law, the court also declared that the time had come for the Second Amendment to be enforced against the states. “The crucial role this deeply rooted right has played in our birth and history compels us to recognize that it is indeed fundamental,” wrote Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain. “We are therefore persuaded that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment and applies it against the states and local governments.”
...(snip)...landmark 2010 ruling in McDonald v. Chicago, which struck down the Windy City’s handgun ban and ruled that the Second Amendment did indeed apply to the states via the 14th Amendment.
...(snip)... In its ruling yesterday, the 9th Circuit found these new regulations to be constitutional. So while the Nordykes lost repeatedly at earlier stages in their case, they ultimately succeeded in their bid to bring gun shows to the county fairground. And more important, they played a crucial role in advancing Second Amendment rights throughout the country. The Bill of Rights stands on a stronger footing thanks to their efforts.
Long article with lots of great detail and discussion: Vindicating the Second Amendment: A Pioneering Gun Rights Case Comes to a Close - Hit & Run : Reason.com
In essence, the Court dodged the main/most important Constitutional issue -- i.e., "the standard of review".
Nordyke gun case nears end : SCOTUSblogNordyke gun case nears end
One of the nation’s longest-running court battles over gun rights staggered toward its end on Friday, leaving uncertain its final legacy in the development of Second Amendment law. The en banc Ninth Circuit Court reached a final decision in the celebrated case of Nordyke v. King (Nordyke VI) without even settling on the constitutional test that gun-regulating laws must satisfy — probably the most important issue still open.
As it emerged Friday as Nordyke VI, on its second round of en banc review, the case brought a three-and-a-half page ruling unanimously dismissing Russell and Sallie Nordyke’s Second Amendment claim but giving them a qualified right to put on gun shows at the fairgrounds in Alameda County, California. The dismissal order was unanimous, but the failure to define a constitutional standard split the judges 7-4.
The Supreme Court has yet to take a case to establish the standard of review, but a number of cases are continuing to develop, and the issue will inevitably reach the Justices.
I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.
I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.
Veni, Vidi, Velcro