BREAKING NEWS -- Divided three-judge D.C. Circuit http://
www.cadc.uscourts.gov holds that the District of Columbia's gun
control laws violate individuals' Second Amendment rights: You
can access today's lengthy D.C. Circuit ruling at this link
http://
pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf .
According to the majority opinion, "[T]he phrase 'the right of
the people,' when read intratextually and in light of Supreme
Court precedent, leads us to conclude that the right in question
is individual." The majority opinion sums up its holding on this
point as follows: To summarize, we conclude that the Second
Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms.
That right existed prior to the formation of the new government
under the Constitution and was premised on the private use of
arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter
being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or
the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from
abroad). In addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the
important and salutary civic purpose of helping to preserve the
citizen militia. The civic purpose was also a political expedient
for the Federalists in the First Congress as it served, in part,
to placate their Antifederalist opponents. The individual right
facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would not
be barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth for militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second
Amendment's civic purpose, however, the activities it protects
are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's
enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued or
intermittent enrollment in the militia.
The majority opinion also rejects the argument that the Second
Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because it
is not a State. And the majority opinion concludes, "Section
7-2507.02, like the bar on carrying a pistol within the home,
amounts to a complete prohibition on the lawful use of handguns
for self-defense. As such, we hold it unconstitutional." Senior
Circuit Judge Laurence H. Silberman <
www.fjc.gov/ servlet/tGetInfo?jid=2189 > wrote the majority opinion, in which
Circuit Judge Thomas B. Griffith
<
www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=3090 > joined. Circuit
Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson <
www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=1023 > dissented. Judge
Henderson's dissenting opinion makes clear that she would
conclude that the Second Amendment does not bestow an individual
right. But her other main point is that the majority's assertion
to the contrary constitutes nothing more than dicta because the
Second Amendment's protections, whatever the entail, do not
extend to the District of Columbia, because it is not a State.
howappealing.law.com/030907.html#023153For the full opinion, see:
pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf.
_______________________________________________
