According to the DC Appeals Court, the District’s gun ban is Unconstitutional [PDF] and the Post has a long article covering the verdict. By a 2-1 verdict, the court ruled that the District’s ban on handguns is unconstitutional. The fight’s far from over, as this will likely spend some quality time being reviewed, then appealed eventually to the United States Supreme Court. The brief itself is available online, and is actually fairly readable, something that definitely surprised me. Here are some of the highlights:
Essentially, the appellants claim a right to possess what they describe as “functional firearms,” by which they mean ones that could be “readily accessible to be used effectively when necessary” for self-defense in the home. They are not asserting a right to carry such weapons outside their homes. Nor are they challenging the District’s authority per se to require the registration of firearms.
The six parties who filed suit don’t object to registering their guns, or keeping them confined to their domicile for self-defense in the home, they just object to being told which kinds of weapons are appropriate for defense in the home.
According to appellants, the Amendment’s language flat out guarantees an individual right “to keep and bear Arms.” Appellants concede that the prefatory clause expresses a civic purpose, but argue that this purpose, while it may inform the meaning of an ambiguous term like “Arms,” does not qualify the right guaranteed by the operative portion of the Amendment.
That there should be civic purpose for the guns kept is a fascinating argument, and I think it would be a great thought exercise here to discuss what constitutes a civic purpose? Neighborhood Watch? Volunteer Policing (a la Fire department)? This isn’t a blanket excuse to give people for owning a gun.
Tellingly, we think, the District did not suggest what sort of law, if any, would violate the Second Amendment today–in fact, at oral argument, appellees’ counsel asserted that it would be constitutional for the District to ban all firearms outright. In short, we take the District’s position to be that the Second Amendment is a dead letter.
Shockingly, an outright ban would pass the test, but the singularity of the DC ban, focusing on handguns alone, is what runs them afoul of the DC District. There’s more here, but this is getting long, so I’m headed behind a cut…
This post appeared in its original form at DC Metblogs Continue reading →