« The Civil War veteran who served in WWI | Main | Oral argument today in Gould... »
Incredible ruling from the 9th Circuit
Striking down Hawaii's "may issue, which means don't issue" permit law for handgun carrying.
Great treatment of the antis favorite claims--carrying isn't at the core of the 2A, the Statute of Northampton, their misconstruing of history, etc.
This, like any honest read of the 2A in the 9th Circuit, will be followed by a motion for rehearing en bans, a grant of that motion, and a new opinion disavowing the one here.
A salute to the victors, Alan Beck and Stephen D. Stamboulieh!!!!
4 Comments | Leave a comment
The 9th Circuit has not actually struck down Hawaii's permit law. It reversed the District Court's order dismissing the plaintiff's complaint (for failing the first step of the 2d Amendment 2-step - that the 2d Amendment does not protect the right to bear arms in public). The opinion states the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms in public and states the plaintiff's complaint states a valid cause of action. The opinion also states that Hawaii's permit system is incompatible with the 2d Amendment, but it remanded to the District Court to make the actual ruling invalidating the permit law.
It would seem the impending threat of Justice Kavanaugh has gotten the District courts to sit up and take notice of Second Amendment once again
If it wasn't for the errors Marshall made we wouldn't be having this problem. Barron v Baltimore (1833) - Bill of Rights DOES NOT BIND the States. While the first and third would be directly applicable to the feds, the others all bind the States under the supremacy clause, regardless of what Madison wanted. Madison's desired were repudiated by the Congress when they put the Amendment of and Articles in addition to at the end. Rawle (1829) had already stated that the BoR bound the feds AND the States.
The Courts are our enemies NOT our friends. They decide things in such a manner as to increase their own importance and power. There are no exceptions to the 2nd. The Right to keep and bear Arms is not to be controlled but actions with those Arms that endanger others can be but only by the States since the feds were only given 6 police powers. All the other police powers exercised by the feds have been stolen by them with the complicity of the courts.
Pretty sure this opinion was written by the same judge that wrote the original Peruta opinion striking down California's similar issue policies. Hopefully, the en banc & appeals won't take too long, seems to be a nice, clean case saying that bear means bear. One that Justice Kavanaugh may want to hopefully look at soon.