Via Alan Gura who says, “Justice never sleeps…. not even on a Saturday afternoon, when this opinion was just handed down.”:
In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District.
20 years ago when I started becoming very involved in the gun owner rights movement I could not have imagined I would be talking about the day when Washington D.C. became “Constitutional Carry” (well, even “Vermont Carry” which what we called it then).
The anti gun people will be crying themselves to sleep tonight. But I’ll be cleaning and lubricating my guns with Liberal Tears:
Well damn! Good.
Mind.
Blown.
Damn that was good to read that decision. Despite it being delayed It was based on Peruta, Moore, and Woollard all shall issue cases. I notice the judge did not cite the 4th circuit decision that shall issue was not required in MD
DC Council will end up putting in Illinois-type rules, the mandatory non-resident access is huge.
If non-residents must be allowed to carry, even after they impose their permit scheme, then under existing precedent every non-prohibited US citizen *and* resident alien who jumps through the hoops will be able to carry in the nation’s Capital, even those who can’t carry in their home states.
The “may-issue” states can hardly claim they have greater “public safety” concerns than the home of the entire US government, especially since their own law-abiding citizens can carry there, but not at home.
The irony and hypocrisy on display will be inescapable, even by the MSM.
The dichotomy
A similar conflict, or dichotomy or dissonance was what brought Heller to the Supremes. Heller could carry in DC as part of his job but could not carry in his home.
Someone who can carry in DC but not in Illinois or California will sue.
If I read that decision correctly as of the afternoon DC is non permit carry. Since DC had no system to allow carry, there is none to prevent people from carry today.
Yep. Absent an injunction until the City Council can meet.
Interestingly enough, DC police chief Lanier has issued orders that non-residents who are not prohibited from firearms possession will not be arrested for carrying as of now.
Based on my reading, the ruling itself would have been satisfied by requiring non-residents to register their pistols, and then not arresting anyone who is carrying a pistol validly registered (in DC) to them.
I’m guessing some fairly bright lawyer pointed out that, because DC has been rejecting registration applications from non-residents (that being one of the core issues in this case), and DC’s registration requirements are arcane, expensive, and take a long time to carry out (especially if everyone who lives within drivign distance of DC and normally carries were to flood the DC system), there would be no way to comply with the spirit of the ruling fast enough to avoid pissing off the court to the point they said, “You know what, DC? Screw it — your permitting system goes, too, since you can’t seem to get oof the damned dime!”
“unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism” is verbiage I’d rather not see in this ruling.
Sadly, true, but the next case that comes up will be something like the case that declared that a tax on printer’s ink was not allowed as an excessive burden on free speech and the freedom of the press (Citation to follow).
I’m looking to stock up on ice skates and sturdy umbrellas. Fantastic ruling.
The next time the DC government meets they will approve the most draconian permit system they can dream up. In the mean time Lanier and her JBT’s will continue to arrest and charge ANYONE who isn’t “special” carrying a weapon.
They KNOW that the arrests will now be illegal but they won’t care….because NOTHING WILL HAPPEN TO THEM FOR CONTINUING THE CRIMINALITY.
This is a victory yes….but a small hollow one.
But it’s like all the victories after Plessey v Ferguson that chipped away at racists being able to use the power of the state to enforce their racist desires, culminating in Brown v Board of Education.
And where can I buy some of that gun cleaning fluid, or the one that gets out copper, Tears of Leftists?
QUOTE
… In the mean time Lanier and her JBT’s will continue to arrest and charge ANYONE who isn’t “special” carrying a weapon.
They KNOW that the arrests will now be illegal but they won’t care….because NOTHING WILL HAPPEN TO THEM FOR CONTINUING THE CRIMINALITY.
This is a victory yes….but a small hollow one.
UNQUOTE
Point well taken.
But apparently you haven’t seen this:
QUOTE
STUNNING DEVELOPMENT: DC Police Chief Lanier just told force not to arrest a person who can legally carry a gun in DC or any state.
As of 6:24 p.m. on July 27, 2014, this is a welcome development. Many have said that the D.C. political establishment will ignore the judges order. This shows that Police Chief Lanier is, at minimum, unwilling to be found in contempt. Notice the broad extent of the order: no arrests for a person who can legally carry a gun in D.C. or any State.
UNQUOTE
Read entire article at: http://www.ammoland.com/2014/07/police-chief-recognizes-carry-reciprocity-in-d-c/#axzz38jZYkBm7
The article does end with:
QUOTE
The situation is fluid. Stay tuned!
UNQUOTE
Very interesting indeed!
I am Cautiously Optimistic that Palmer will Stand, but not right away. After all, this strikes right at the Heart of the Liberal Utopian Fallacy (i.e., that “ONLY a Certain Enlightened Progressive Political Class should be ALLOWED to Rule, all for the Benefit of Humanity, of course.”), so expect this to be fought Tooth and Nail (all being paid for by Tax Dollars). And they will drag it out as long as they can, just like Chicago and Illinois has done.
In fact, I don’t see this hitting SCOTUS until the 2015-2016 Session.
But we should Prevail. Just not Tomorrow.
And Hopefully, someone will NOT Open Carry an AR past the City Hall.
Not Just Yet. Patience is a Virtue.
I have read the remarks are they are very impressive, informational, and mainly omit the emotional and embellishing personal editorial. Everyone has them, however they are not applicable to the discussion. We need to stay professional and state the facts. It is great that a state can become a formidable foe to oppose a federal regulation. In this case, residing in Maryland, a ” may issue state” like a minority of others vs. about 30 states as “shall issue” states, I believe our campaign against ” may issue states” legislators rises above the state level. The reasoning based on the constitution in which the Judicial branch of government can override the individual states Legislative branch based on the basis of The Constitution and its Amendments which are applicable to every American citizen. The inherent right to bear arms to protect oneself from a person or governmental tyranny and being allowed to extend that protection outside the home is an unprovoked life or death situation is an unalienable right from our founding fathers. As the saying goes ” God Bless America”.