The court says, for instance, that the Heller decision does not mean to cast doubt on longstanding bans on felons having possession of firearms, or bans on the mentally incompetent having possession of weapons, bans on weapons in sensitive places and restrictions on the sale and purchase of weapons. But to say you’re not casting into doubt those things is not the same thing as to say that those laws are all constitutionally permissible. And indeed, if the court was saying those are all constitutionally permissible laws, there’s certainly no argument in the opinion or justification for why those laws are constitutional and the D.C. handgun ban is not constitutional.
July 17, 2008
Heller’s Fallout The Court’s Decision Raises More Legal Questions Than It Answers
[Excellent point! I had been annoyed that the Brady Bunch and other have been saying all these various restrictions were constitutional and I couldn’t find it in the Heller decision. All I could find was that the Heller decision didn’t apply to those restriction. I presumed that was because those weren’t at issue in the Heller case. I’m glad someone with more legal expertise agrees with my reading of this. Hence my reading of Heller is that the court is inviting challenges to those restrictions.–Joe]