Just announced--SCOTUS will hear DC Gun Ban Case

[Harry Carry]

And now we wait.

[Dan M.]

Hear it when? Early next year?

[Harry Carry]

Brighter minds than mine know how SCOTUS schedules these things, but I'd assume it would be early next year.

[CCWInstructor]

Originally Posted by Harry Carry

Brighter minds than mine know how SCOTUS schedules these things, but I'd assume it would be early next year.

It should be March, let me check their schedule.. . ..

[CCWInstructor]

Gun Case | SCOTUSblog

Court agrees to rule on gun case
Tuesday, November 20th, 2007 1:02 pm | Lyle Denniston | Comment (1) | Print This Post
Email this • Share on Facebook • Digg This!

After a hiatus of 68 years, the Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to rule on the meaning of the Second Amendment — the hotly contested part of the Constitution that guarantees “a right to keep and bear arms.” Not since 1939 has the Court heard a case directly testing the Amendment’s scope — and there is a debate about whether it actually decided anything in that earlier ruling. In a sense, the Court may well be writing on a clean slate if, in the end, it decides the ultimate question: does the Second Amendment guarantee an individual right to have a gun for private use, or does it only guarantee a collective right to have guns in an organized military force such as a state National Guard unit?

The city of Washington’s appeal (District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290) is expected to be heard in March — slightly more than a year after the D.C. Circuit Court ruled that the right is a personal one, at least to have a gun for self-defense in one’s own home.

The Justices chose to write out for themselves the question they will undertake to answer. Both sides had urged the Court to hear the city’s case, but they had disagreed over how to frame the Second Amendment issue.

Here is the way the Court phrased the granted issue:

“Whether the following provisions — D.C. Code secs. 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02 — violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?”

The first listed section bars registration of pistols if not registered before Sept. 24, 1976; the second bars carrying an unlicensed pistol, and the third requires that any gun kept at home must be unloaded and disassembled or bound by a lock, such as one that prevents the trigger from operating.

[swdr]

For those who want some background...

--> Prof. Volokh's: Sources on the Second Amendment

[BonoVox]

I can see both sides sweating it out. One of them is going to get the old "be careful what you wish for" in the end. Well no guts...no glory!

[WKC]

Supreme Court Will Hear D.C. Guns Case

The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. That decision supported the collective rights view, but did not squarely answer the question in the view of many constitutional scholars.

I certainly don't get that view when I read the opinion. Here is an interesting read on Miller http://www.kc3.com/pdf/PECULIAR_STORY_US_V_MILLER.pdf

[swdr]

Originally Posted by WKC

Supreme Court Will Hear D.C. Guns Case

I certainly don't get that view when I read the opinion. Here is an interesting read on Miller http://www.kc3.com/pdf/PECULIAR_STORY_US_V_MILLER.pdf

It's what you would expect from an AP "news" story.

[SierraNevadaCCW]

Ok...well anyone want to call this one? Bets? LOL

[OCRancher]

Originally Posted by WKC

Supreme Court Will Hear D.C. Guns Case

I certainly don't get that view when I read the opinion. Here is an interesting read on Miller http://www.kc3.com/pdf/PECULIAR_STORY_US_V_MILLER.pdf

Yikes, that is long! I started to read it but do not have the time to digest it now.

[DParker]

Originally Posted by SierraNevadaCCW

Ok...well anyone want to call this one? Bets? LOL

I'm not a betting man....but at first glance....

I'd expect that the following would vote for an individual rights view:

Roberts
Scalia
Kennedy
Thomas
Alito

and Ginsberg could be a wild card given her civil rights background.

Anyway, that's still five of nine...so I'm hopeful...

[SierraNevadaCCW]

Yea...I heard the report on it with Sheperd Smith... Personally, I think we have a real shot here

[RAD-G27]

Not worth a new thread, but NBC4.com has a poll going, so far it's 88% in our favor, I think, the wording of the question is bad. It reads "Would you like to see the Supreme Court uphold or overturn D.C.'s gun ban?", it should read " Uphold the decision of the court to overturn D.C.'s gun ban.

Vote early and often.

Forgot the link: Supreme Court Will Hear D.C. Gun Ban Case - News Story - WRC | Washington

[NikNak]

"I HAVE A DREAM!"