The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has ruled 2-1 in favor of the plaintiffs in Parker v. D.C. The ruling overturns the District's ban on handgun ownership, as well as its requirement that rifles and shotguns be disassembled and locked up. This is a terrific win for the self-defense rights of D.C. residents and a stupendous Second Amendment victory that will have nationwide impact.
The District will ask for an en banc review by the entire court. If the court upholds the ruling (which is probable, IMO), expect the Supreme Court to take the appeal:
District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty told reporters Friday afternoon that the District will appeal the ruling.
In a 2-1 decision, the judges held that the activities protected by the Second Amendment "are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued intermittent enrollment in the militia."
"This is a huge case," Alan Gura, the plaintiffs' lead lawyer, told FOXNews.com Friday afternoon. "It's simply about whether law-abiding citizens can maintain a functioning firearm, including a handgun, inside their house."
Gura said his six clients, all Washington residents, challenged three separate District of Columbia laws: A 31-year-old law that prevents handgun registration; a law that requires rifles and shotguns to be either disassembled or disabled when being stored; and a law that requires a permit to carry a gun in your own home.
Senior Judge Laurence Silberman (a Reagan appointee) wrote the opinion, and Thomas Griffith (a Bush 43 appointee) concurred. As for the Bush 41 appointee on the panel (emphasis added):
Judge Karen Henderson dissented, writing that the Second Amendment does not apply to the district because it is not a state.
WTF??? I hereby nominate that as the Single Stupidest Argument Against the Second Amendment Ever. And there's no shortage of worthy competitors for that title.
I wonder if Judge Henderson is prepared to apply that argument to other rights of the people in the District. What a crummy President George Herbert Walker Bush was, and what awful judicial appointments he made!
I haven't read the opinion (it's 75 pages; here's a link to the PDF), but Jed Baer has, and he's impressed. That's saying something — Jed's a pretty tough critic of such things, and he's practically giddy:
I encourage you to download and read this decision, as it contains one of the best arguments and explanations of how the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right that I've read in a while. In a significant rebuke of the District of Columbia, the opinions uses words such as "risible" in dismissing the District's legal arguments. It also does a good job of explaining the issues in the oft misinterpreted Miller decision, and in explaining the composition of the militia, and how that relates to the 2nd Amendment.
The opinion starts off with a discussion of the issue of standing, which is interesting by itself. If you want to dive right into the meat of the 2A opinion, jump to the bottom of page 12. I'm not going to quote any of the opinion, because I think the entire thing, from p.12 onward, is worth reading in its entirety.
Jed also has more links to other commentary from the RKBA community than you can shake a cordless mouse at — it's your one-stop-shopping place for Parker v. D.C.
It's a great victory for self-defense-rights advocates, and it deserves to be celebrated. There's a gun show in Denver tomorrow — I may just have to purchase a handgun or two in honor of Judge Silberman.
