Appeals court refuses to rehear Parker!

Appeals court refuses to rehear Parker!

This is a discussion on Appeals court refuses to rehear Parker! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has turned down the D.C. city government's request for a rehearing in Parker v. District ...

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Appeals court refuses to rehear Parker!

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array Blackeagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Columbia, SC

    Appeals court refuses to rehear Parker!

    The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has turned down the D.C. city government's request for a rehearing in Parker v. District of Columbia. The original decision was made by a three judge panel. The city asked the entire circuit to rehear the case. Since the court has refused, the only remaining avenue of appeal for the city is the Supreme Court.
    Last edited by Blackeagle; May 8th, 2007 at 02:16 PM. Reason: fix link

  2. #2
    VIP Member
    Array Miggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Miami-Dade, FL
    Good news!

    SAF Says D.C. Circuit Denial On Re-Hearing of Parker Case Was Right

    Print article
    Refer to a friend
    2007-05-08 19:55:30 -

    BELLEVUE, Wash., May 8 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- This morning's decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to deny a petition from the District of Columbia for a hearing of Parker v. District of Columbia before the full court was "right and proper," said Alan M. Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation.

    "This is a strong signal that the D.C. Court of Appeals, which is the second most powerful court in the country, feels the original ruling by Senior Judge Laurence H. Silberman is solid," Gottlieb
    stated. "It is now up to the district to accept the ruling and begin the process of licensing handguns to be kept legally in district residences, or to appeal the case to the Supreme Court."

    The Parker case has become the most significant Second Amendment case in the nation's history, because for the first time, a gun control law was struck down on the grounds that it violated the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Judge Silberman's ruling found that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms that goes beyond service in a militia.

    "The time is long past due for the Supreme Court to hear a case that has such gravity in terms of the Second Amendment and its true meaning," Gottlieb observed. "For almost 70 years, a state of confusion has existed over whether the Second Amendment protects an individual civil right, as we are certain it does, rather than affirming some convoluted 'collective right' of the states to form militias. That interpretation has been carefully fabricated over the years by anti-gun zealots whose ultimate goal is to strip American citizens of their firearms rights.

    "We think this question must be answered," he continued, "to forever silence those gun control extremists who have been misinterpreting -- we believe deliberately -- the 1939 U.S. v Miller case in an on-going effort to destroy the cornerstone of the Bill of Rights, and the foundation for liberty in this country. This appears to be the right case, and this is certainly the right time."

    The Second Amendment Foundation ( is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 600,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

    Contact: Alan Gottlieb (425) 454-7012

    Source: Second Amendment Foundation
    You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
    Randy Cain.

    Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
    Signed: Me!

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array peacefuljeffrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    south Florida
    Sweet, I think!

    If the appeals court won't rehear it, I have to assume that it means they don't find grounds for the appeal.

    At least, this way if the case is indeed headed to the Supreme Court, we won't have to wait anxiously and restlessly to find out what the appeals court was going to say. Straight to the Supremes or not at all, in which case I would expect the anti-freedom, anti-self defense firearms laws in D.C. to be struck from enforcement. (Would it mean they were struck from the actual statute book, or not?)

    We are going to win this one. We have to; we're in the right.

  4. Remove Advertisements

  5. #4
    Senior Member Array Shadowsbane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    North Carolina
    well heaven or hell this will come down to the end. Just a bit worried considering the Courts rules the public good meant more tax money by building a walmart on your land. Our right to property has been partially stripped what makes you think that our other ones will not follow suit?

    That being said sometimes it is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness.
    Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array peacefuljeffrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    south Florida
    So if they really screw it up and pass a judgment down that's clearly defective, we revolt. Maybe it's due time for that, too.

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array Bob The Great's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Slidell, LA
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowsbane View Post
    sometimes it is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness.
    I like that a lot.

    I'm gonna go ahead and call this decision a good thing. I think it has a good chance of being heard by SCOTUS, and a better chance of being upheld.

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member Array 4my sons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Out side of Richmond, VA
    Okay, is the tide turning, I'm scared to be to hopefull.

    I am sure not going to quite pestering my reps, or writing the media.

    I've said it before, This could turn into a fight for all the marbles. God I hope we win.

    Is there a fingers crossed smiley?
    "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." [Warren v. District of Columbia,(D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981)]
    If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand

  9. #8
    Senior Member Array Steve48's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    St. John, Kansas
    Just maybe, they might get it right this time. Steve48

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array peacefuljeffrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    south Florida
    4my son: Think Good Thoughts

    Nothing is gained by refusing, through an excess of caution, to be hopeful.

    Try BELIEVING. We KNOW we're RIGHT. Let's have confidence that our side can put forth the winning truth, that we ARE entitled to gun rights, via constitutional protection and via simply our god-given right to protect ourselves.

    Loads of historical fact is on our side. Loads of scholars and lawyers know the truth -- to say nothing of millions of American gun owners.

    Let's believe in ourselves and in our rightness, and we'll see that we come out on top.

  11. #10
    Distinguished Member Array craze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    IF it goes to the Supreme court I think the sooner the better. Whatever you may think of Bush we did get what appears to be 2 good new Justices out of this administration. I don't think we want to wait untill after 08. No telling who we may have in office to pick the next Justice or two.
    "Some people go to bed with Lucifer..........then cry, cry, cry when they don't greet the day with God."

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Uhhh....hasn't Bumper posted a thread regarding political action (both peaceful and less than peaceful)?

    I'm just a bystander here...not wanting to be caught in a crossfire...and looking to help you out.

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array Sheldon J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Battle Creek, Mi.
    this is very good indeed!

    United States Court of Appeals
    No. 04-7041 September Term, 2006
    Filed On: May 8, 2007 [1039073]

    Shelly Parker, et al., Appellants
    District of Columbia and Adrian Fenty, Mayor of the District of Columbia, Appellees

    BEFORE: Ginsburg, Chief Judge, and Sentelle, Henderson, Randolph, Rogers, Tatel, Garland, Brown, Griffith, and Kavanaugh, Circuit Judges

    O R D E R

    Appellees’ petition for rehearing en banc and the response thereto were circulated to the full court, and a vote was requested. Thereafter, a majority of the judges eligible to participate did not vote in favor of the petition. Upon consideration of the foregoing and appellees’ Fed. R. App. P. 28(j) letter, it is ORDERED that the petition be denied.
    Per Curiam

    Mark J. Langer, Clerk

    Michael C. McGrail
    Deputy Clerk
    "The sword dose not cause the murder, and the maker of the sword dose not bear sin" Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac 11th century

  14. #13
    Member Array auburn4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    upstate S.C.
    All the Lobbyist on the left will be giving favors to the city adm."NOT TO APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT".

  15. #14
    VIP Member
    Array dr_cmg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    The Supreme Court does not have to actually hear this case to help us. All it has to do is the same thing the Appeals Court did - refuse to hear it. By refusing to hear it, SCOTUS implicitly says that there is no basis to consider the ruling. It let's the ruling stand thereby indicating that it is a good ruling.

    This is one of three possible outcomes of an appeal. Two of the possible outcomes are good and one is bad. The other good outcome would be for the court to hear the appeal and rule in favor of the judgment handed down by the district court. This is in fact the best outcome because it puts into print for all other courts to see the proper understanding of the Second Amendment and informs law making bodies in our country what the limits of their power is.

    The third possible outcome is the bad one. If the SCOTUS either reverses the district court or remands it for some reason. Of those two possibilities reversal is the worse outcome. Depending upon the reason for remanding that may not be a problem.

    Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. Albert Einstein

  16. #15
    VIP Member
    Array Rob99VMI04's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    NOVA...200 square miles surrounded by reality
    My only problem with this. Where are DC residents going to buy Handguns? You have to purchase handguns in the state that you are a resident of. So who will they get them from?
    Its not about guns...Its about Freedom!

    Assistant Instructor @ Located in the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area "Why should your training be any less special?"

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Similar Threads

  1. Taser.... Ruling by Fed. Appeals Court
    By XD in SC in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 30th, 2009, 09:53 AM
  2. Appeals court tosses out NYC lawsuit
    By Arisin Wind in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: May 2nd, 2008, 11:27 AM
  3. GCO wins in GA Court of Appeals
    By ber950 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: December 7th, 2007, 07:58 PM
  4. DC appeals Parker case to SCOTUS
    By pogostick in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: July 21st, 2007, 01:25 PM
  5. Parker Vs DC PDF court File
    By Rugerman in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 15th, 2007, 10:16 AM