Federal Appeals Court Upholds Post-Heller D.C. Gun Control Law
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a 2-1 decision today upholding the District of Columbia's Firearms Registration Amendment Act of 2008, which was enacted after the Supreme Court struck down D.C.'s handgun ban in District of Columbia v. Heller. Gun owner Dick Heller was once again at the center of the case, though as Case Western Reserve law professor Jonathan Adler observes, "this time he was not so lucky." Writing in dissent, D.C. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh explains why he would have struck the law down:
D.C.'s law requiring registration of all lawfully possessed guns in D.C. is not part of the tradition of gun regulation in the United States; it is the most stringent such law in the Nation; and it is significantly more onerous than traditional licensing requirements or record-keeping requirements imposed only on gun sellers. Registration requirements of the kind enacted by D.C. thus do not satisfy the Supreme Court's history- and tradition-based test.
Download today's decision in Heller v. D.C. here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
OT: Stossel did a show on "What if libertarians were in charge?" which aired on 10/2. I DVR'd it and am watching it now, it's reminiscent of some discussions that have happened on here. Somalia!
Easy. Old people would be dying en masse in the streets fighting over garbage and catfood while us libertarians would sneer at them as we walked by with our walking canes, top hats, and monocles en route to inspect our highly pollutive child labor factories.
What a stilted, contrived, spoon fed imagination you have!
Who the fuck walks? Especially with all those nasty dying poor people about? I inspect my factories from the seat of my tax-exempt corporate jet.
WTF walks? The people carrying my sedan chair, that's who. It's called 'job creation' people.
And actually they run, if they know what's good for 'em.
Stossel cruises the forums for show idea inspirations. I believe he posts under the name... Tony
Ah, he must have a sense of humor. I knew I liked him.
I remember hearing Chicago mayor Daley bitching up a storm after the Heller decision saying that the right-wing was going to take America back to the days of the Old West, where people shot each other in the streets. That was one year ago.
What's happened since? Well gun-related homicides are down across the board in Chicago, New York, and DC. Maybe people should, I don't know, question conventional widsom, like how crime rates in Old West mining towns were signifcantly lower than in urbanized areas with police forces because power was evenly divided among an armed citizenry.
""was going to take America back to the days of the Old West,""
Heard the same crap when states started doing CCW permits years ago.
The Old West wasn't even that much like the Old West.
Not much at all.
I guess Heller has a shot at the Supreme Court again?
If you take the time to read the opinion, you will discover that the majority does not even bother to examine the textual argument.
It is what courts have become. Truthfully, they have from the beginning. They have abandoned their oaths to defend and uphold the constitution.
They have exchanged their solemn duty to be an impenetrable bulwark against every assumption of power by any branch or agency of the state for membership in what Codevilla accurately describes as the Ruling Class.
Membership does have its privileges.
Frankly, you can tell you're in trouble when the majority opinion starts from the viewpoint of "but this 'right' doesn't actually mean you have the right to purchase, own, or use any specific firearm in particular." The chain of logic seems to be "we agree that the right can be limited; this is a limitation; therefore this is OK." The idea that a right could be limited into effective nonexistence doesn't seem to occur to them, or bother them if it does.
Since when does can be limited mean the same thing as shall not be infringed?
Release the Kagan...
I loled.
This sucks.
But the moooozlemzzzz won't be able to get guns now. You should be happy, Suki.
I guess this means that the wankers in D.C. will have to keep blaming their gun crime on Virginia, because we all know they won't ever admit that their precious gun control is a ludicrous failure.
Personally, I trust the authorities to establish law and order and provide my security.
Your essay is good, I like it very much. Here I would like to share with you some things :
Cheap UGG Boots http://www.classicuggs-uk.com
-----ercai
ugh.
anonbot > you
I've emailed you my credit card information, along with my checking account routing number. I eagerly await the arrival of my new Uggs!
cici
thanks
About 850,000 football Android devices are activated every day,