The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 26, 2014, 04:57 PM   #1
Jim March
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,309
We just won Palmer at the DC District Court!

http://alangura.com/wp-content/uploa...CT_OPINION.pdf

The main question left: will DC appeal this to the Supremes?!?!?!

After all this wait...we even have language saying they cannot screw over non-residents (of DC)!
__________________
Jim March

Last edited by Jim March; July 26, 2014 at 07:11 PM.
Jim March is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 05:09 PM   #2
mehavey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,865


Emily Miller's take:
Quote:
"Washington, D.C. is the only place in the country where no one is allowed to
legally carry a gun outside the home. District residents are trying to challenge
the law in court, but the justice system has denied them due process. [since 2009]
The almost five-year delay in Palmer v. District of Columbia is so extreme that some
suspect political games...."
[duh....]
Quote:
Whether you are for or against gun control laws, the issue here is one of
access to the courts when your rights have been infringed. As long as Judge
Scullin refuses to rule, Americans who live in or visit the District are being denied
their fundamental right to self-defense, as well as their right to due process.
BTW: You can bet your biippy this will go all the way to SCOTUS

Last edited by mehavey; July 26, 2014 at 05:18 PM.
mehavey is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 05:20 PM   #3
Jim March
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,309
DC will likely appeal it ONE step up (to the DC Circuit) but if they lose there, I'm not sure they'll take it to the Supremes. Chicago didn't after their loss in the 7th Circuit.
__________________
Jim March
Jim March is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 05:29 PM   #4
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,309
Here are the important bits:

Quote:
In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia's complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is
unconstitutional. [p. 16]
Quote:
the Court further ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this memorandum-Decision and Order, are permanently enjoined from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) to ban registration of handguns to be carried in public for self-defense by law-abiding citizens [p. 18]
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 07:15 PM   #5
9mm
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 9, 2011
Location: Land of the Free
Posts: 2,711
So when can we carry? What's off limits? The federal places such as capital, linconal memorial? WWII, so forth
__________________
See user title
9mm is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 07:19 PM   #6
kilimanjaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 1,861
Not for at least another year, the District is going to appeal just for bloody-mindedness.

Even then, expect another year for them to work out the 'regulations' for compliance, just like Chicago is doing.
kilimanjaro is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 07:47 PM   #7
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
As I read it, the decision enjoins DC from enforcing it's ban against firearms outside the home IMMEDIATELY, and the judge did not stay his order. That means, unless my reading comprehension is completely off, anyone in DC with the legal right to possess a firearm may carry it in public.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...onstitutional/

From the article:
Quote:
The court ordered the city to now allow residents from the District and other states to carry weapon within its boundaries.

Judge Scullin wrote that the court “enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of [D.C. firearms laws] unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.”
Seems pretty clear cut to me. Until DC writes and enacts a carry law that is compliant under Heller and McDonald, the carry of firearms is now legal in DC.
csmsss is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 08:01 PM   #8
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,760
Given the current strategy of the Anti's, I don't think it really matters any more. They'll just pass a slightly less restrictive law and start the whole process over. Our system only works for those with honest intentions who "accidentally" go too far. It doesn't account for those who use the system against itself, knowing that every step takes years to resolution and a simple change of a few sentences resets the clock.

Until the courts slap it down, hard, they'll just keep doing it. I don't even know if the courts have the necessary authority. There is no penalty that I'm aware of for intentionally passing unconstitutional laws.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old July 26, 2014, 08:10 PM   #9
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
I guess we'll see how quickly the DC govt. can get itself together and pass a new law. In the meantime, unless DC can get the DC court of appeals to issue an injunction or TRO, carry is now legal in DC.
csmsss is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 08:13 PM   #10
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
What I like most about this decision is that the jurist actually seems to have read the precedents and is applying them, as opposed to so many who pay lip service to Heller and then go straight away to ignoring its application and intent.
csmsss is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 08:21 PM   #11
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,368
I also noticed and welcomed the specific enjoinder against discriminating against non-residents of DC.

Let's face it, when United States citizens can't exercise the rights guaranteed to them under the United State Constitution in the capital of the United States -- that's pretty messed up.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old July 26, 2014, 10:39 PM   #12
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,309
Quote:
Not for at least another year, the District is going to appeal just for bloody-mindedness.
In that case, it goes to the DC Circuit, who supported Heller back when it was Parker. (Hipster Circuit Court loved the 2A before it was cool.)

Quote:
That means, unless my reading comprehension is completely off, anyone in DC with the legal right to possess a firearm may carry it in public.
In theory, yes. In practice, I wouldn't advise it.

The city will probably push for a stay on Monday.

Quote:
They'll just pass a slightly less restrictive law and start the whole process over.
That's what they did in the wake of the Heller decision. They quickly passed the Firearms Registration Emergency Amendment Act to create as many hurdles as legally feasible for would-be gun owners. I don't expect anything other than an arbitrary and rigorous may-issue system.

If they don't get a stay, the pressure will certainly be on.

However, here's a thought. It's pure speculation on my part, but bear with me.

Gura brought this suit after the Emergency Whatchamajigger passed. The District Court did its best to ignore it. It was Chief Justice Roberts who intervened and ordered Scullin to hear it.

Maybe this is the carry case SCOTUS has been waiting to hear.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 05:35 AM   #13
TXAZ
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: TEXAS!
Posts: 1,382
On carrying in the District NOW, Tom noted:
Quote:
In theory, yes. In practice, I wouldn't advise it.
I agree the language is pretty blunt: So if (an otherwise non prohibited) someone DID decide to test this today, what could DC do to them if caught with a handgun in the District?
__________________
!أنا لست إرهابي
TXAZ is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 07:18 AM   #14
press1280
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 218
DC would probably arrest them like they normally do, look for any other violations (high cap mags, hollow points,exc.), drag the person through the mud and eventually drop the charges. You've also got a good portion of the city located within school zones, which is another potential minefield at this time.
As far as Congress stepping in, I don't know. If Congress alone controls (no POTUS signing necessary), perhaps something could get passed. However I think based on the National Reciprocity vote that a good shall-issue law would need another 2-3 votes. The House would be a slam dunk. It might be better though if they don't step in just so the case moves up the ladder, as it is the most clear cut for SCOTUS to take.
press1280 is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 10:24 AM   #15
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,315
Asleep at the helm, here!

But who expects a judge to wake-up the court clerks and file their decision on a Saturday!!

This is actually a very big decision, as Judge Scullin has correctly interpreted Heller and McDonald.

For those of you that haven't read this 19 page decision, it is here: http://www.archive.org/download/gov....37887.51.0.pdf
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 01:16 PM   #16
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,309
Quote:
But who expects a judge to wake-up the court clerks and file their decision on a Saturday!
No kidding. This one had been delayed and buried so many times, I'd forgotten about it.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 01:21 PM   #17
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
Gura brought this suit after the Emergency Whatchamajigger passed. The District Court did its best to ignore it. It was Chief Justice Roberts who intervened and ordered Scullin to hear it.

Maybe this is the carry case SCOTUS has been waiting to hear.
Maybe, but I no longer believe that it matters who hears it.

They'll set up a permitting/purchase/registration process that goes;

1)
a
b
c
...
z

2)
a
b
c
...
z

3)
a
b
c
....

all the way to;

29)
a
b
c
...

And when it gets struck down they'll just remove a sub-step "a" here or an "h" there, maybe a whole step somewhere, and start over.

They know that it'll be YEARS before it can be undone and it, again, won't matter when it is, they'll just drop ANOTHER "a" or "c" or whole step, knowing they've got dozens and every one takes years so it really doesn't make any difference at all.

The courts are either unwilling or unable to stop it, so it will never stop.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old July 27, 2014, 02:45 PM   #18
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
Maybe this is the carry case SCOTUS has been waiting to hear.
There is a great deal of merit to this view. Other cases involve the intricacies of licensing and carry laws, but Palmer is nearly (except for obtaining a nonexistent license) an absolute carry prohibition. Whatever case the Supreme Court might eventually take, the simpler the question, the better.

We have seen how the lower courts cling to the specifics of Heller to claim that the Second Amendment exists on some sliding scale that diminishes the further an issue is from "hearth and home." A straightforward carry case could correct that notion and be less susceptible to being misconstrued than the minutiae that would necessarily be involved in some of the more complex licensing cases we have seen.
gc70 is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 02:53 PM   #19
motorhead0922
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 494
Congratulations are in order for all those involved in this fight. Well done!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scullin
As stated above, with respect to Plaintiff Raymond's Second Amendment claim, the District of Columbia may not completely bar him, or any other qualified individual, from carrying a handgun in public for self-defense simply because they are not residents of the District.
I think this could be applied to say that no state (or even no city) can have a total ban on non-resident carry (California et al).
__________________
NRA, SAF, ACLDN, IDPA

Give me liberty or give me death.
motorhead0922 is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 04:51 PM   #20
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Norris
For those of you that haven't read this 19 page decision, it is here: http://www.archive.org/download/gov....37887.51.0.pdf
Still sleepy, Al? The link in the opening post takes us to the 19-page decision.

Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 05:05 PM   #21
jrinne0430
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 30, 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 154
In the meantime, I am sure the DC police will ignore the ruling just as they do with other ruling they dont like, such as when someone is legaling videoing them...arrest, confiscation, harrass, etc.
jrinne0430 is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 05:53 PM   #22
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca
Still sleepy, Al? The link in the opening post takes us to the 19-page decision.
As good as Gura may be, or as much as we all trust the man, don't you think that an unbiased source (as in direct from the court, itself) is better?

(that's my story and I'm stickin' to it )
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 06:22 PM   #23
Jim March
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,309
Al, do you remember the Silveria case? Pre-Heller, 9th Circuit, three-judge panel decision that went badly against us penned by "Justice" Reinhardt?

You can go find the "official" copy, or you can look at mine:

http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/Silveira.pdf

The difference is interesting, because this decision was penned literally days before life completely blew up for one Michael Bellesiles, the scumbag lying author of "Arming America" that Clayton Cramer eventually detonated. The original Silveira decision cited to Bellesiles. Weeks later an amended version was filed that stripped out references directly to Bellesiles, while still leaving behind references to a symposium whose contents were all "Bellesiles fan club" crap.

So - point is, the copy on Gura's site is actually MORE likely to remain authentic (long term) than the "authentic original" that bad judges can still screw with.
__________________
Jim March
Jim March is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 06:29 PM   #24
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,309
Quote:
In the meantime, I am sure the DC police will ignore the ruling just as they do with other ruling they dont like, such as when someone is legaling videoing them
That's why I wouldn't advise carrying there. I've heard of the DC police refusing to acknowledge legal carry under the LEOSA.
__________________
In the depth of winter I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus
Tom Servo is offline  
Old July 27, 2014, 07:47 PM   #25
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,315
Jim, I already have both copies of Silveira.

My point was that since the Internet Archives has the issued copy of the case, it won't accept a revised copy, unless it is given a different docket number. In which case, both versions will reside in the archives.

I stand by my previous post.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13103 seconds with 7 queries