« NRA Board elections | Main | Brady releases its annual report card »
Washington State Supreme Court on incorporation
State v. Sieyes (pdf), handed down today. Defendant was charged with possession of a handgun by a minor. The court, in an extremely thoughtful ruling (citing Joyce Malcolm, Eugene Volokh, William van Alstyne and others) rules that the 14th Amendment due process clause incorporates the right to arms and makes it binding on the States, then remands for a determination as to whether the law passes muster (which was barely briefed). The dissent argues there is no need for remand, because strict scrutiny applies and the law fails that test. The dissent has interesting references to teenager possessing arms, and serving in the militiary, throughout American history.
4 Comments | Leave a comment
Any court decision could make an impression on any other court, depends on how its reasoning stikes the other judge(s).
In other words, "It couldn't hurt!"
A state's supreme court is the final determiner of the laws of that state. Even the SCOTUS has to abide by those decisions in an action that deal solely with the laws of that state. Thus for Washington state the 2nd Amendment is now incorporated. Problem is that this is possible a Federal question.
As to precedential value, this case would have a persuasive precedent on the SCOTUS but is certainly not binding unless it was a question of state laws - statute or commonlaw.
Johnson is dead on. The standard of review must be addressed in McDonald. Strict Scrutiny is the correct answer and for the majority to not say so, in this and the Heller court, is simply allowing liberal justices to not strike these laws down.
There is still hope in this case that the Court of Appeals will go with the dissent and apply the SS standard to the statue. Then if the WSC doesn't like it, it can take the case up again...which it won't.
So, if the COA's applies a lesser standard, then I doubt the WSC would take up the case again either. Lets hope it is properly argued below. This is going to have an effect nation wide...unless McDonald case puts this issue to rest.
Out of curiosity: Would a state supreme court decision like this make any impression on the US Supreme Court?
Jeff