Liberal California Court Undermines Gun Rights… Again

From the Daily Caller News Foundation:

Eleven judges of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will rehear a challenge to a local law which strictly limits where new gun retailers may be opened.

A three-judge panel heard the case in May and sided with pro-Second Amendment activists, ruling their challenge to the law could proceed. The full 9th Circuit elected to review that decision this week, dealing a blow to the gun rights activists. The decision is the latest in a string of defeats gun rights groups have suffered in the 9th Circuit. Earlier this month the court upheld a California state law imposing a 10-day waiting period on all firearms challenges.

take our poll - story continues below

Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?

  • Will the Democrats try to impeach President Trump now that they control the House?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Trending: Thanks to Obama, California is Engulfed in Forest Fires

The case was occasioned when a group of businessmen hoping to open new firearms retailers challenged an Alameda County ordinance that prohibits new gun stores in unincorporated areas within 500 feet of residential neighborhoods, liquor stores, schools, or other gun shops. The lower court ruled in May the county had failed to justify its infringement on a constitutionally-protected activity and that a challenge to the law could proceed in federal court.

“[T]he County has failed to justify the burden it has placed on the right of law-abiding citizens to purchase guns,” wrote Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain in the May decision. “The Second Amendment requires something more rigorous than the unsubstantiated assertions offered to the district court.”

O’Scannlain, a Reagan appointee, will assume senior status at the end of the year. (RELATED: California Concealed Carry Battle On Track For Supreme Court)

That decision will now be reviewed by an 11-judge panel led by Chief Judge Sidney Thomas, a Clinton appointee. A group of prominent conservative and libertarian legal scholars — including Eugene Volokh, Randy Barnett, and Glenn Harlan Reynolds — wrote an amicus (or “friend of the court”) brief for the Firearms Policy Foundation urging the full 9th Circuit not to review the decision.

“The outcome here could affect whether dozens of other city, county, and state laws are going to be subjected to grueling litigation challenges,” said Brian Goldman of Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, who is representing Alameda County. “We’re glad the court’s going to take a closer look at this,” Goldman continued.

Goldman says 17 other cities and towns in California have similar laws, and a decision favoring the gun-rights advocates would subject all of those ordinances to litigation.

Tags 🇺🇸

I am the supreme law of the United States. Originally comprising seven articles, I delineate the national frame of government. My first three articles entrench the doctrine of the separation of powers, whereby the federal government is divided into three branches: the legislative, consisting of the bicameral Congress; the executive, consisting of the President; and the judicial, consisting of the Supreme Court and other federal courts. Articles Four, Five and Six entrench concepts of federalism, describing the rights and responsibilities of state governments and of the states in relationship to the federal government. Article Seven establishes the procedure subsequently used by the thirteen States to ratify it. I am regarded as the oldest written and codified constitution in force of the world.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.