Overall a positive view through a 2A lens.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/05/02/36272.htm
Courthouse News Service:
Quote:
|
(CN) - The 9th Circuit on Monday gave new life to a long-running dispute over a California county's ordinance that could ban gun shows on its property, finding that several U.S. Supreme Court decisions over the last six years call into question whether the ban violates the Second Amendment . . .
|
Yet, the court said this:
Quote:
For their equal protection claim, the Nordykes argued that the county favored military re-enactors over gun-show participants, as the ordinance allowed such re-enactors, who carry historic firearms loaded with blanks, to use the fairgrounds.
Again, the panel found the Nordykes' argument wanting.
"The county could reasonably conclude that gun shows are more dangerous than military reenactments," O'Scannlain wrote. "This is enough to satisfy rational basis scrutiny."
|
Isn't rational basis off the table for all fundamental enumerated rights according to Heller? I assume they are talking about the equal protection claim, or is equal protection of the law somehow not a fundamental right? What am I missing here?
Also, how does the court believe that the county to reasonably conclude gun shows are dangerous, when there was NO evidence in the record that the gun shows caused violence? I think the county even stipulated that there were no violent incidents elated to the the gun show.
No-one wants to commit robbery or assault at a gun show, yet the court believes the county could reasonably conclude otherwise.
__________________