DC appeals Parker case to SCOTUS

[pogostick]

Game on...

http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletyp..._amendmen.html

Monday, July 16, 2007
UPDATE: Second Amendment case headed to Court

Posted by Lyle Denniston at 10:57 AM

Local government officials in Washington, D.C., announced Monday they will appeal to the Supreme Court in a major test case on the meaning of the Second Amendment. The key issue in the coming petition will be whether the Amendment protects an individual right to have guns in one's home- an issue on which there is now a clear conflict among federal Circuit Courts.

The petition would have been due Aug. 7, but city officials said Monday that they would ask Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., for a 30-day extension of time to file the case. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty and city Attorney General Linda Singer disclosed the appeal plan at a press conference, along with local Police Chief Cathy Lanier.

The D.C. Circuit Court ruled on March 9 that the Second Amendment does guarantee an individual right to possess a gun -- at least within one's own home. The ruling was the first by a federal appeals court to strike down a gun control law based on that view of the Amendment's reach. The case is Parker, et al., v. District of Columbia (docket 04-7041). On May 8, the Circuit Court refused by a 6-4 vote to rehear the case en banc. The mandate is scheduled to be issued Aug. 7, but will be withheld after the city files its Supreme Court petition. Thus, the existing gun law -- said to be the most restrictive in the nation -- would remain in effect temporarily.

In an earlier filling in the D.C. Circuit, city officials said their appeal to the Supreme Court would present some variation of these questions: "(1) whether the panel majority's decision conflicts with the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), as Judge [Karen LeCraft] Henderson concluded in dissenting from the panel majority's decision; (2) whether the Second Amendment protects firearms possession or use that is not associated with service in a State militia; (3) whether the Amendment applies differently to the District because of its constitutional status, as Judge Henderson also concluded; and (4) whether the challenged laws represent reasonable regulation of whatever rights the Amendment protects." The city noted that the panel had acknowledged that its ruling conflicts with decisions "of most other federal courts of appeals, many State courts, and the highest local court in this jurisdiction, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals."

The Circuit Court majority found that one of the six Washington residents who filed the challenge to the local gun control law had a right to bring the lawsuit. That individual is Dick Anthony Heller, a special police officer who works at the Federal Judicial Center (home of the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts) near Capitol HIll in downtown Washington. He is licensed to carry a handgun on his job, but he applied for permission to have a pistol in his home he was denied a license under the local law. Heller has said in court papers that he lives in a hgh-crime neighborhood in the city.

Heller, according to the Circuit Court, had standing to sue to challenge the gun registration provisions of the local law, as well as the clause tht bars anyone from carrying a pistol without a license and a provision requiring all owners of licensed guns to keep them disassembled or with a trigger lock engaged when not in use.

The D.C. law has been in effect for nearly 31 years -- since September 1976. The lawsuit to strike it down was filed in February 2003.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[OPFOR]

SCOTUS, don't fail us now....

[MIKEV]

Gonna keep my fingers crossed.

[Redneck Repairs]

Hang on to your Butts boys and girls ..... Here we go , This will be one of the most important and far reaching cases that the SCOUS takes on in the coming century ... its a roll of the dice for all the marbles .

[packinnova]

Hang on to your Butts boys and girls ..... Here we go , This will be one of the most important and far reaching cases that the SCOUS takes on in the coming century ... its a roll of the dice for all the marbles .

Yeah...I'm both nervous and excited at the same time!

[SammyIamToday]

Here's to hoping they do the right thing!

[Janq]

Hang on to your Butts boys and girls ..... Here we go , This will be one of the most important and far reaching cases that the SCOUS takes on in the coming century ... its a roll of the dice for all the marbles .

Bingo. ^^

This I was hoping against hope would not occur.

- Janq

[pgrass101]

This is it, whatever they decide will be the rule.

How many pro-gun judges?

Maybe they will just let the lower court ruling stand.

[Sonic Misfit]

Bingo. ^^

This I was hoping against hope would not occur.

- Janq

+1

I'm with you Janq, I was hoping that DC would just give up. This is going to be a tense time waiting on the outcome.

[mcp1810]

Any bets they decline to hear the case and let the lower court's ruling stand?

[Janq]

mcp,

That would be the right thing to do and for this country the best thing too.

- Janq

[Musketeer]

It is tough to call which way this will go.

At least with the PTS presiden O'Connor off the bench we "appear" to have the upper hand. At the same time I am worried that either Alito or Roberts (mostly Alito) will take the Bush stance that gov't should be able to regulate everything...

My gut feeling... They will refuse to take the case and leave the ruling to stand. Not giving a ruling of their own is a passive agreement to the original ruling but will not carry serious weight across the nation.

[Redneck Repairs]

I honestly believe that the SCOUS as it sets now will come down in favor of the 2nd as an individual's right rather than a collective or state right . However it is not a slam dunk or miller would not stand , and we would have no NFA items , or conversely according to miller we should only be able to own " militia" firearms without restriction . Personally i look for SCOUS to not only come down on the side if individual rights , but to codify exactly what restrictions may be imposed on said right ... that folks is the part we may not like . On the other hand they may simply decide that D.C. is a federal reserve ( such as a military base , and as such the limitations/advantages of the 2nd do not really apply .

Edited to add: The refusal of the D.C. circuit court to hear the case En Banc to me is a pretty strong indicator that they at least feel the SCOTUS will grant cert. Its called pass the buck upline for a decision .

[Bob The Great]

I don't know why people are afraid of this. I won't say that I'm certain of the outcome, but this is exactly what SCOTUS is supposed to do: settle disputes in interpretation of the constitution.

IMO, the judges currently on the bench are the best chance we're going to get of getting an honest, correct, and "un-spun" interpretation of the 2A. I'm not going to predict a ruling, but if we (as gun owners) are sure we're in the right, then why be scared of clarification?

It's the anti's trying to duck and weave and say that the 2A means something other than what it says. They should be afraid of authoritative clarification, and honestly, I'm a little surprised that they are pushing this. We don't have to put a spin on anything, because we're not trying to change the meaning of the amendment. Clarification is a good thing for us, so long as it's done with intellectual honesty. And right now seems to be the best opportunity to do it.

[raysheen]

Hang on to your Butts boys and girls ..... Here we go , This will be one of the most important and far reaching cases that the SCOUS takes on in the coming century ... its a roll of the dice for all the marbles .

my thoughts exactly...I'm very interested as to whst this could mean for gun rights in this country. I guess it's a halfway decent court for this case to fall on too right? ...not ideal, but better than some courts of the past.
I'm very glad that DC appealed this...I think (hope) that they will regret doing so...either way the case turns out, it could be monumental.