8
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + Line 5:
Line 5: − + Line 52:
Line 52: + + + +
Update with ruling.
'''''District of Columbia v. Heller''''' is the most significant [[gun control]] case in the [[United States]] in about 70 years.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/washington/13scotus.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss NY Times article].</ref> Oral argument before the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] took place on [[March 18]], [[2008]]. Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] took the unusual step of authorizing an early release of the audio recording of argument to the public.<ref>http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-scotus-audio,0,7739435.story</ref>
'''''District of Columbia v. Heller''''' wass the most significant [[gun control]] case in the [[United States]] in about 70 years.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/washington/13scotus.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss NY Times article].</ref> Oral argument before the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] took place on [[March 18]], [[2008]]. Chief Justice [[John Roberts]] took the unusual step of authorizing an early release of the audio recording of argument to the public.<ref>http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-scotus-audio,0,7739435.story</ref>
In March 2007, The Court of Appeals for the [[D.C. Circuit]] invalidated a 31-year-old [[gun control]] statute in the [[District of Columbia]] based on an interpretation that the [[Second Amendment]] protects an individual right to own firearms, by declaring that "the right in question is individual" and not, as gun control proponents claim, a collective right limited to membership in a state militia.<ref>''Parker v. District of Columbia'', 478 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2007).</ref> The D.C. statute had completely prohibited residents of the [[District of Columbia]] from possessing firearms in a manner compatible with [[self defense]]. The Court, in striking it down, relied on a Department of Justice memo that observed, "The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of States or a right restricted to persons serving in militias."<ref name="amendment">[http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf DOJ Memo].</ref>
In March 2007, The Court of Appeals for the [[D.C. Circuit]] invalidated a 31-year-old [[gun control]] statute in the [[District of Columbia]] based on an interpretation that the [[Second Amendment]] protects an individual right to own firearms, by declaring that "the right in question is individual" and not, as gun control proponents claim, a collective right limited to membership in a state militia.<ref>''Parker v. District of Columbia'', 478 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2007).</ref> The D.C. statute had completely prohibited residents of the [[District of Columbia]] from possessing firearms in a manner compatible with [[self defense]]. The Court, in striking it down, relied on a Department of Justice memo that observed, "The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of States or a right restricted to persons serving in militias."<ref name="amendment">[http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf DOJ Memo].</ref>
That appellate struck down the 31-year-old statute in D.C. as unconstitutional. ''[[Parker v. District of Columbia]]'', 478 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2007). The Court cited how the D.C. gun control prohibited ownership of handguns for self-defense even within one’s home, and the panel of judges relied on a Department of Justice memo that observed, "The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of States or a right restricted to persons serving in militias." <ref name="amendment" />
That appellate struck down the 31-year-old statute in D.C. as unconstitutional. ''[[Parker v. District of Columbia]]'', 478 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2007). The Court cited how the D.C. gun control prohibited ownership of handguns for self-defense even within one’s home, and the panel of judges relied on a Department of Justice memo that observed, "The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of States or a right restricted to persons serving in militias." <ref name="amendment" />
In 2007 the [[United States Supreme Court]] granted [[certiorari]]<ref>Docket No. 07-290.</ref> to reconsider the appellate decision. Oral argument will be held Tuesday, March 18, 2008, and a decision is expected in late June 2008. The Court indicated that it would address the following issue ("Question Presented"):
In 2007 the [[United States Supreme Court]] granted [[certiorari]]<ref>Docket No. 07-290.</ref> to reconsider the appellate decision. The Court indicated that it would address the following issue ("Question Presented"):
:Whether the following provisions—D.C. Code §§ 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.
:Whether the following provisions—D.C. Code §§ 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 brief by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is more strident: "Consistent with the responsibilities of municipal government confronted with a public health crisis among its most vulnerable, the District of Columbia enacted narrow legislation to staunch the contagion."<ref name="academy">http://www.gurapossessky.com/news/parker/documents/07-290tsaAmerican%20Academy.pdf</ref> The AAP devotes one of its argument headings to its claim that "children cannot be taught gun safety."<ref name="academy" />
The brief by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is more strident: "Consistent with the responsibilities of municipal government confronted with a public health crisis among its most vulnerable, the District of Columbia enacted narrow legislation to staunch the contagion."<ref name="academy">http://www.gurapossessky.com/news/parker/documents/07-290tsaAmerican%20Academy.pdf</ref> The AAP devotes one of its argument headings to its claim that "children cannot be taught gun safety."<ref name="academy" />
== Ruling ==
On June 26th, the Court ruled in favor of Heller, finding that the District of Columbia's gun laws violated the Second Amendment, which grants an individual right to bare arms. Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] wrote the majority opinion, which noted that certain gun control laws such as prohibitions against ownership by felons and the mentally ill were not in violation of the Amendment.
== References ==
== References ==