Message from 9th circuit

[ilbob]

We are therefore persuaded that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment and applies it against the states and local governments.

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opin.../20/0715763.pdf

[bk425]

That's -huge-1 Now I just wish for:
1- Same thing from other (potentially more sane sounding) courts and
2- A link that works for me :)

[Unisaw]

That link won't open for me.

[RoadKingLarry]

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/04/20/0715763.pdf
Try this one^

Still a loss for Nordyke and a convoluted opinion at best.
Pretty much "Yes the 2nd applies to the states but they can regulate it away pretty much any way they want."

[Matthew Carberry]

It doesn't say they can "regulate it away" at all.

The only issue the Nordykes raised was holding gunshows on County property.  The Court properly noted that that didn't impact individuals rights to keep and bear arms but merely the right to hold a gun show. 

There was no "self-defense on County property" issue raised, which would have given the court a hook to pull in more of Heller's commentary on self-defense.

This is a clear win and gives precedent for the suits that are coming in San Fran AND whenever the Cali carry permit equal protection issues are raised.

[Matthew Carberry]

The 9th had to work pretty hard to find a way to comply with Heller without overturning one of their own prior precedents though, that's why all the verbiage.

[El Tejon]

Holy cow!  I am tired from reading that.  Man, they had to run laps not to bump into stare decisis. 

I hope the judges stretch out or go to yoga after that opinion.  All of that bending and twisting and dodging and weaving will leave them sore.

Huge win for us.

It's the frickin' 9th Circuit and we have incorporation!!!  Just wait until the 7th Circuit gets a chance!  (It will be much, much stronger).

Just think what how this will play tomorrow morning in Mayor Daley's morning briefing.

Do we have a date on McDonald yet?

Step One:  individual fundamental right
Step Two:  incorporation
Step Three:  Strict Scrutiny standard
Step Four:  all kinds of state and federal anti-First Amendment laws go bye-bye

[MillCreek]

A very interesting opinion from the Ninth Circuit, of all places.  Those of us who live in that Circuit are astonished.

[Matthew Carberry]

Ya know, for all our smug absolutism and Cali bashing, they really only stand out as "anti-gun" compared to the rest of the Western states.

Here's the real interesting state to watch with this ruling.

Hawa'ii.

No one ever talks about it but it has, AFAIK, gun laws closer to Massachusetts than any of its Circuit partners.

So, Cali will almost certainly be getting better, what does this mean, potentially, for the islands?

[ilbob]

Ya know, for all our smug absolutism and Cali bashing, they really only stand out as "anti-gun" compared to the rest of the Western states.

Here's the real interesting state to watch with this ruling.

Hawa'ii.

No one ever talks about it but it has, AFAIK, gun laws closer to Massachusetts than any of its Circuit partners.

So, Cali will almost certainly be getting better, what does this mean, potentially, for the islands?

No offense, but CA gun laws are among the most restrictive in the country. NY and MA are really the only ones much worse.

HI is about where CA is.

[Matthew Carberry]

I shouldn't have downplayed it I guess.

But California has bills and challenges already in motion that looked promising prior to this ruling.  Aside from the state AWB, wasn't the biggest issue very county specific "may-issue" problems in terms of unequal treatment?

I guess my point is that the whole state of Hawa'ii is like the very worst of California's counties, but there's no option to move a few miles and change your circumstances. 

[ilbob]

I shouldn't have downplayed it I guess.

But California has bills and challenges already in motion that looked promising prior to this ruling.  Aside from the state AWB, wasn't the biggest issue very county specific "may-issue" problems in terms of unequal treatment?

I guess my point is that the whole state of Hawa'ii is like the very worst of California's counties, but there's no option to move a few miles and change your circumstances. 

CA has a ten day waiting period.

CA has the only statewide ban on something like 90% of all handguns (the not unsafe list).

CA bans many commonly owned semiautomatic rifles based largely on arbitrary cosmetic features.

Something like 98% of the population of the state of CA has no chance at all of getting a CC permit.

Incidentally, DC adopted the CA "not unsafe" handgun law. It is now the subject of a court challenge there. Since the 9th court says the 2A is incorporated, if the DC circuit court says the DC version of the "not unsafe handgun" list is not an acceptable 2A infringement, guess what happens to the CA handgun roster? And PDQ.

[Matthew Carberry]

Well sure, when you lay out the facts like that...

 

Here's to rapid overturnings.

[Strings]

>what does this mean, potentially, for the islands<

They might issue their second carry permit?

[CNYCacher]

No offense, but CA gun laws are among the most restrictive in the country. NY and MA are really the only ones much worse.

Really?

CA has a ten day waiting period.

Must suck.  BTW this friday evening I am going to my Bass Pro to pick up a 10/22 for a Saturday outing.

CA has the only statewide ban on something like 90% of all handguns (the not unsafe list).

Yikes.  MA has that but not NY.

CA bans many commonly owned semiautomatic rifles based largely on arbitrary cosmetic features.

We got that, although what we DONT have is people getting busted for legal scary-looking weapons.

Something like 98% of the population of the state of CA has no chance at all of getting a CC permit.

NYC is about 40% of our population, most of the rest of us can get lifetime CC permits.

[Balog]

He's so cute when he's getting uppity about NY or Linux. 

[Matthew Carberry]

He's so cute when he's getting uppity about NY or Linux. 

 

[seeker_two]

This decision came from the NINTH Circuit?!?!?!

What's next? Barney Frank becomes straight & conservative? Richard Simmons wears long pants? Secret documents are found where Col. Jeff Cooper admits that the 9mm is a great cartridge?

[CNYCacher]

He's so cute when he's getting uppity about NY or Linux. 

  I'm better now 

So, can anyone explain in layman's terms what this novel means?  My head is starting to hurt reading it.  We are closer to getting the 2nd recognized as a protected right under the 14th?

[El Tejon]

The 2nd Amendment applies to the states via the 14th!

We are missing a "standard of review".  Fundamental, invidual rights receive "strict scrutiny" review.

Here the 9th Circuit said, "Yes, the 2nd Amendment applies to the states, but the states can do anything they want."

*Buzzer*

No, they cannot.

This is another piece of the puzzle.  When the 9th Circuit says that the 2nd Amendment is so fundamental that it applies to the states, we are on a roll and have Big Mo.

Step 1:  individual, fundamental right
Step 2:  incorporation
Step 3:  strict scrutiny
Step 4:  bye-bye gun control as we know it 

[RevDisk]

This is another piece of the puzzle.  When the 9th Circuit says that the 2nd Amendment is so fundamental that it applies to the states, we are on a roll and have Big Mo.

Step 1:  individual, fundamental right
Step 2:  incorporation
Step 3:  strict scrutiny
Step 4:  bye-bye gun control as we know it 

Could you please expand on steps 2 and 3?   Some of us are unfamiliar with the details of incorporation and especially strict scrutiny. 

[El Tejon]

Incorporation=>applying the Bill of Rights to the States via the Fourteenth Amendment. 

While many state Supreme Courts (mostly Southern oddly enough!) were applying the Federal BoR to the states, the Federal Supreme Court held that the BoR only applied to the Congress and not the states.

After the dismal failure of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, Congress passed the 14th Amendment which the Framers intended to apply the BoR to the states so that the South would be forced to stop terrorizing the freedmen (at least by state action).  The Federal Supreme Court reacted by "selectively incorporating" the BoR to the states on a case by case basis.  The First Amendment was not applied to the states until the 1920s.

Short history:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Incorporation+(Bill+of+Rights)

Strict Scrutiny=> test for a law as it impacts a fundamental individual right.

Different levels of review:  rational basis, intermediate level, strict scrutiny.

Strict scrutiny requires government have a compelling interest that is narrowly tailored using the least restrictive means.  In our issue, crime may be a compelling interest for the government but gun bans are hardly the least restrictive means and are not narrowly tailored. 

Wikipedia does not have a bad explanation:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny

[gunsmith]

http://reason.com/blog/show/132996.html

NOT the huge win for the Nordykes, but for western states this is a major, major victory.
smoke that ceegar and say thanks to calguns & CA gun owners!

[Gewehr98]

I merged Gunsmith's thread with the already-existing thread on the same topic.

[Matthew Carberry]

Yeah, try to keep up gunsmith.  I was posting on this yesterday.

Because I'm unemployed right now and have lots of time...