Cert granted in Parker!!!!!
Court rephrased the question presented as:
"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? "
DC had phrased it as:
"Whether the Second Amendment forbids the District of
Columbia from banning private possession of handguns
while allowing possession of rifles and shotguns."
Parker/Heller had phrased it as:
" Whether the Second Amendment guarantees law-
abiding, adult individuals a right to keep ordinary,
functional firearms, including handguns, in their
7-2502 is the registration requirement. 2502.02 is the ban. 22-4504 is the pistol carry permit, which was construed to cover moving of a firearm within the home. 2507.2 is the "functional firearm" ban. Inclusion of the last in the grant is, I think, a good sign for Parker/Heller. They wanted it included, but DC insisted it hadn't filed for cert. on the issue.
Prime and load. Make ready!
Posted by: Rudy DiGiacinto at November 20, 2007 11:23 AM
Looks like they are going to address the issue of long arms in the home but not the issue of standing.
Posted by: Assman at November 20, 2007 11:29 AM
The REAL question?
"...of individuals who are not affiliated
with any state-regulated militia,..."
Posted by: RKM at November 20, 2007 11:32 AM
Any thoughts on the qualifying phrase "keep ... in their homes" (as opposed to, for example, possession in a broader sense)?
Or does SCOTUS wording basically mirror the DC code wording?
Posted by: PN NJ at November 20, 2007 11:46 AM