High Court To Announce Ruling on D.C. Gun Ban

[onehandle]

Source: Washington Post

With its term coming to an end, the U.S. Supreme Court this morning is expected to issue its ruling on the District's handgun-ownership ban in a case that could result in a landmark interpretation of the Second Amendment.

In District of Columbia v. Heller, the city is challenging an appellate ruling that its 32-year-old handgun ban is unconstitutional. Advocates on both sides of the gun control debate have been bracing for the decision since the case was argued in March.

The ruling could settle a decades-old debate over whether the Second Amendment gives individuals the right to own firearms or only confers a collective right for states to form armed militias.

The District's gun control law, passed in 1976, is among the nation's toughest. It prohibits handgun ownership by anyone in the city who did not own one before the law was enacted.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/25/AR2008062502712.html

---

Ah. Fuel to get the Gun Nuts of America to the polls.

[Dr.Phool]

1. Ready........Aim.........

:nuke:

[Tejas]

2. hmm, somebody doesn't remember the 1994 massacre.......

"Ah. Fuel to get the Gun Nuts of America to the polls."



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=118


Stop by, you'll be surprised to learn just how politically active "Gun Nuts" are.

[michreject]

3. Scalia is writing the opinion

I'm thinking 6-3 against the ban.

[boomerbust]

4. Ban will remain

You know the right wingers in D.C. are secrectly hoping for the ban to remain in effect. There could be some nutjobs in D.C. who are not exactly happy with the "work" the pukes have done the last 8 years. NRA NRA NRA, but keep handguns out of our D.C. backyard!!!

[bossy22]

5. doubtful

with scalia writing the oppinion most likely- the ban will be gone

i think under any standard of review the ban would be found unconstitutional- it didn't accomplish anything

[boomerbust]

7. bossy22

As far as constitutional rights are concerned you are correct, but I think right wing hypocrisy will again rear its ugly head.

[bossy22]

8. hopefully not

but we shall know in less than 90 minutes

[comtec]

6. is it possible for a no-comment ruling?

they've done that before.
Saying that they do not wish to comment because of the impact.

[-..__...]

9. Sure, they could do that.

They're the SCOTUS... they can do anything they please.

They could also send the case back to the lower court.

Another possibility being tossed around is a plurality opinion.

I think the first two (no comment, remand back to the lower court), are highly unlikely and a plurality opinion a distinct possibility.

The most likely outcome (IMHO), being an affirmation that the RKBA is an individual right and that the DC handgun ban and storage requirements are unconstitutional, and that reasonable restrictions are allowed.

[bossy22]

10. they could rule that

turtles prefer hard candy

i know it would make no sense but they are the SCOTUS- they can rule anyway they want for any reason

[SlipperySlope]

14. A no-comment ruling wouldn't be very useful.

If the court simply issued a "remand or affirm" decision, without any comment, then the lower courts would have no guidance on how to rule on similar cases.

It is the duty of SCOTUS to somewhat explain the reasoning behind their rulings, so that lower courts can understand what line of reasoning to apply when other cases come along.

[bossy22]

11. YES

AFFIRMED

[surf]

12. This isn't a partisan issue.

As a gun owning democrat, I'm really happy about todays decision.

[happyslug]

13. Here is the Opinion

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

It is a 5-4 decsion

"SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,
C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined."