Wilmette has suspended enforcement of its 19-year-old ordinance banning handgun possession in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that appears to invalidate such bans.I don't know who would have observed such a lunatic edict anyway, but I learned long ago what a fringe minority people like me belong to.
But this gives me another opportunity to reiterate a point I hinted at in the last "Update" to my "Heller Affirmed" post.
Say a lawsuit is brought in hostile territory, say Ninth Circuit country, like San Francisco. We're constantly reminded they are the most overturned circuit on the country, so we know they have a penchant for getting things wrong, and you know it's on purpose-- since it gives them a chance to extend their agenda, and many times keep it going-- knowing full well that SCOTUS doesn't take every case brought before it.
So I'm just sayin' it's not a gimme that a lawsuit will succeed. There's a possibility it will not, and the high court will refuse to hear it and resolve it--leaving "settled" law and precedent in that district, and a model to be emulated in others.
I bring this up not to say don't press forward, but rather to make sure we do it with eyes wide open. If a leader wants me to follow him into a fight, I want to make sure the risks have been assessed.
And as always, since I'm not a lawyer, I'll appreciate anyone who does have expertise educating me on this.
[Via HZ]
we'd probably be better off hammering away at dc and worry about incorporation later
ReplyDeletefenty explicitly stated they will push the envelope as far as they possibly can (bans on all semi-autos, use zoning to prevent any dealers from selling handguns or even operating in the district, etc.) dc's an easy litigation target, and their circuit court seems at least somewhat amenable to considering the constitution a legitimate legal document.
i agree, the 9th is a lost cause.
It would be hilarious if it were not so tragic, that criminals MAY or may NOT be dimly aware of all these wonderful restrictive laws and do it anyway, or, if they're brighter than average, be aware and consciously use their government-given advantage.
ReplyDeleteI guess David is right and we ARE a fringe. Not just as to gun ownership but insisting on freedom.
Us and the crooks. The great middle ground between says "OK, Boss, you know best."
A ban on POSSESSION. Fighting words.
I should know this, living in Illinois, but how does the 7th Circuit rate, in terms of the odds of getting a just decision?
ReplyDeleteHere's my take on Willmette's moratorium on enforcing the law. It is illegal. If the law is on the books, it should be enforced.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with the enforcement of such laws, but by declaring a moratorium instead of repealing the law Willmette may just have given the courts an excuse to deny petition of redress due to lack of standing as no one is now being harmed by this illegal law. Meanwhile Willmette gets to keep the law, ready for reactivation at the first sign of a sympathetic ruling anywhere in the country.
Therefore, it appears to me that the first thing that now must be done is to get Wilmette in court to answer for selective enforcement of the law, before any challenge to the law itself can be successfully mounted in court.
Could Wilmette declare a moratorium on enforcing the laws against murder, rape, speeding, or other laws? Of course not. If the law in question is not worthy of enforcement that law is not worthy of existence.
By doing what they have done they have added another whole layer of litigation to the battle and possibly many years of time before they must answer for the basic question.
The moratorium is immoral, but elegant in its evil machinations.
Hear! Hear! Straightarrow!
ReplyDeleteDavid -
ReplyDeleteIn this case it is worth pressing ahead in kalifornia (and elsewhere) to fight CCW permitting requirements, permitting, the approved list, assault weapons ban and the 50 cal restrictions.
Don't forget there is more than one fed district in ka and the eastern district is not as loopy as the 9th circuit.
Also, though you are right in principle about making law by being stopped at the 9th, in this case I think (I hope)that there will be so many lawsuits in all circuits across the country and with very strong likelihood of incorporation under the 14th amendment making the individual right applicable to the states that the tide and the scholarship will overwhelm the courts and settle the issue for good.
The worst that the 9th will be able to do is create a conflict of law which ultimately will require scotus to take up the issue again and define the level of scrutiny that has to be applied to ANY / ALL gun regulation.
This is where the issue becomes tenuous again based on the 5-4 nature of the ruling and the two incompetant / abhorant candidates and the proposed court appointments that could be foisted on us by the time the next case(s) make it to the supremes. In this respect, time is of the essence for bringing the next cases.
But for now, kalifornia, NY, IL and every other state - litigate them to distraction and bankruptcy - Litigate EVERY regulation and imposition - Sue them for civil rights violations -death by a thousand cuts.
Fight islam Now
NRA/CCRKBA filed suit against San Francisco on Friday, 6/27. (US District Court, Northern District of California)
ReplyDeletePara 23 on p 6 directly goes to the incorporation issue - 14th Amendment, due process.
And Gura has filed against Chicago (IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ), again asserting incorporation at paras 48 and 49 on p 9.