Quote:
I'm still waiting for the pivotal case to get us to the most fundamental question: How can a government agency require a license (and a fee) for the exercise of a constitutional right?
How far would any state get if they tried to enact a law requiring a license (and a fee) to publish a book or magazine, or a permit to attend church?
|
Well even the Peruta decision here didn't go so far as to say Concealed Carry was a right. They just said some form of carry was a right. My state is both Shall Issue and OC. Because OC is legal, with the Peruta reasoning, I'll likely never be able to get a free Concealed Pistol License.
I also wonder if the fee question isn't a 400 pound gorilla hiding under a rock. If a fee for a carry permit of whatever name is unconstitutional when open carry is banned, that's the crack in the armor for challenging the NICS fee if there is one. (Is there by the way? I'm not an FFL but I've heard they have a fee to pay for access to the NICS check that's passed on to customers through firearms prices of FFL transfer fees).
It also opens questions (for me anyway) on the legality of charging a fee for a state issued identification card given all the rights that all but require one. For example, when you don't have one how long may law enforcement seize (4A) you to verify your identity? ID is apparently required for the FFL/4473 process as I found out when mine was expired. When/If voter ID is passed, we're now on another right. Very few methods of interstate travel are possible without ID. A fee to get a US passport would create the same question. The US recognizes a freedom of movement inside the US (and possibly internationally) in the Privileges and Immunities clause of the Constitution, and probably internationally when they adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Which doesn't mean these services will be free, merely that like the poll tax, when/if these charges are struck down, instead of people using the service paying a fee, we're all just going to pay another X% (with X probably being a very small number to the right of the decimal point) in sales and income taxes. And while that's not necessarily bad, it seems like the lawyers could be playing pinball with the courts over tax revenue for a while.
Quote:
|
It's a split the size of a nuked grand canyon.
|
Especially when you realize the size of the courts involved. The 9th is absolutely gigantic. Even though it's 2 courts vs 3 courts, the number of states involved are still nearly equal.