From the NRA-ILA, we have
this announcement:
Quote:
NRA CHALLENGES CONSTITUTIONALITY OF FEDERAL HANDGUN BAN FOR LAW ABIDING 18-20 YEAR OLDS
Wednesday, September 08, 2010
Fairfax, Va. -- The NRA is challenging federal laws that prohibit law-abiding Americans eighteen through twenty years of age from legally purchasing a handgun through a federally licensed firearm dealer. The case was filed Tuesday evening in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Lubbock Division. James D'Cruz of Lubbock, TX is the plaintiff in this case.
....
The case is D'Cruz v. BATFE.
Copyright 2010, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
|
There is a companion case to this. Perhaps the NRA-ILA saved the additional announcement for its Texas members. Regardless, the companion case is D'Cruz v. McCraw, and seeks to invalidate the Texas statutes that prohibit an adult aged 18-20 from obtaining a Texas Concealed Carry Permit.
This two pronged attack is very well considered and I suspect will move very fast. The State case will, because it is a state case and does not involve the federal government, will move faster than the federal case.
I suspect both the State and the Feds to try to invalidate D'Cruz's standing, by holding the Navgear standard (D.C. Circuit) applies. I don't think that will fly, if the 5th Circuit follows the suggestions in
Bach v. Pataki (2nd Circuit).
Should the case proceed, it will most likely be a slam-dunk. I simply can't see the courts holding that a fundamental right can be regulated by some arbitrary age limit. Remember that the 1968 GCA was enacted 3 years before the 26th amendment (18yr old voting) was ratified.
Since then, anyone 18 years or older are adults in the legal sense.