DC Circuit adopts individual rights view of Second Amendment.Voids
DC law.

>>>>>>>>>> BREAKING NEWS — Divided three-judge D.C.
Circuit panel holds
that the District of Columbia’s gun control laws violate individuals’ Second
Amendment rights: You can access today’s lengthy D.C. Circuit ruling at this
link.

According to the majority opinion, “[T]he phrase ‘the right of the people,’
when read intratextually and in light of Supreme Court precedent, leads us
to conclude that the right in question is individual.” The majority opinion
sums up its holding on this point as follows:

” To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment protects an
individual right to keep and bear arms. That right existed prior to the
formation of the new government under the Constitution and was premised on
the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the
latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the
depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad). In
addition, the right to keep and bear arms had the important and salutary
civic purpose of helping to preserve the citizen militia. The civic purpose
was also a political expedient for the Federalists in the First Congress as
it served, in part, to placate their Antifederalist opponents. The
individual right facilitated militia service by ensuring that citizens would
not be barred from keeping the arms they would need when called forth for
militia duty. Despite the importance of the Second Amendment’s civic
purpose, however, the activities it protects are not limited to militia
service, nor is an individual’s enjoyment of the right contingent upon his
or her continued or intermittent enrollment in the militia.

“The majority opinion also rejects the argument that the Second Amendment
does not apply to the District of Columbia because it is not a State. And
the majority opinion concludes, “Section 7-2507.02, like the bar on carrying
a pistol within the home, amounts to a complete prohibition on the lawful
use of handguns for self-defense. As such, we hold it unconstitutional.”

“Senior Circuit Judge Laurence H. Silberman wrote the majority opinion, in
which Circuit Judge Thomas B. Griffith joined. Circuit Judge Karen LeCraft
Henderson dissented.

“Judge Henderson’s dissenting opinion makes clear that she would conclude
that the Second Amendment does not bestow an individual right based on what
she considers to be binding U.S. Supreme Court precedent requiring that
result. But her other main point is that the majority’s assertion to the
contrary constitutes nothing more than dicta because the Second Amendment’s
protections, whatever they entail, do not extend to the District of
Columbia, because it is not a State.

“This is a fascinating and groundbreaking ruling that would appear to be a
likely candidate for U.S. Supreme Court review if not overturned first by
the en banc D.C. Circuit. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

http://howappealing.law.com/030907.html#023153

Professor Joseph Olson, J.D., LL.M. o- 651-523-2142
Hamline University School of Law f- 651-523-2236
St. Paul, MN 55113-1235 c- 612-865-7956
[email protected]

The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !