sundog, the ACRU amicus brief was filed last October. It was part of the initial action, during the cert stage.
Whoa there RDak! It is exactly as rwilson wrote. This is only the first step in a long line of steps.
The Supreme Court is not going rule in such a manner that it will immediately break all the assorted State and Federal gun laws. While most, if not all, of us here are hoping for the best, we have to keep in mind what is at stake.
The question that was crafted, by the Court, is a very narrow question and as I see it, comes in two parts:
The Court, of course, can rule however narrowly or broadly as they want on this question. As has been pointed out by several of the petitioners amici, the decision of the Court may affect such laws as the Machine-gun ban of 18 U.S.C. 922(o). They do not want this to happen. Hence all the arguments over the collective rights (Militia) issue.
That goes to the first part of the question: Do Second Amendment rights accrue to individuals who are not affiliated with a militia.
The DOJ, interestingly enough, admits that an individual right exists, but also argues that it is not a fundamental right, and therefore the standard of review should not be strict scrutiny, but something they call "heightened" scrutiny be applied. When reading the DOJ brief, the Solicitor General describes this "heightened" scrutiny as something more than the rational basis test, but less than intermediate scrutiny.
That argument strikes at the second part of the question: Are the Second Amendment rights of individuals violated, by the D.C. Codes, who wish to keep private arms for personal use in their homes.
Under the DOJ's test, the two lessor D.C. Codes may not stand up, but the handgun ban just may.
And let's be honest here, of all the briefs that have been written, there are only two briefs that have stayed within the scope of the question as presented by the Court. That would be the DOJ brief and Heller's brief.
While I believe the Court will rule for the respondents, I don't think it will go anywhere as far as some are hoping. I would be happy for the Court to simply say that the right is an individual right and that the D.C. Codes violate that right.
Such a decision would seem to imply that at least, Intermediate scrutiny is applied to Second Amendment cases.
And lastly, welcome to theFiringLine Kenneth and thank you for the needed information and the kind remarks about the nature of this thread.
Whoa there RDak! It is exactly as rwilson wrote. This is only the first step in a long line of steps.
The Supreme Court is not going rule in such a manner that it will immediately break all the assorted State and Federal gun laws. While most, if not all, of us here are hoping for the best, we have to keep in mind what is at stake.
The question that was crafted, by the Court, is a very narrow question and as I see it, comes in two parts:
Whether the following provisions [of D.C. Code,] violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?
The Court, of course, can rule however narrowly or broadly as they want on this question. As has been pointed out by several of the petitioners amici, the decision of the Court may affect such laws as the Machine-gun ban of 18 U.S.C. 922(o). They do not want this to happen. Hence all the arguments over the collective rights (Militia) issue.
That goes to the first part of the question: Do Second Amendment rights accrue to individuals who are not affiliated with a militia.
The DOJ, interestingly enough, admits that an individual right exists, but also argues that it is not a fundamental right, and therefore the standard of review should not be strict scrutiny, but something they call "heightened" scrutiny be applied. When reading the DOJ brief, the Solicitor General describes this "heightened" scrutiny as something more than the rational basis test, but less than intermediate scrutiny.
That argument strikes at the second part of the question: Are the Second Amendment rights of individuals violated, by the D.C. Codes, who wish to keep private arms for personal use in their homes.
Under the DOJ's test, the two lessor D.C. Codes may not stand up, but the handgun ban just may.
And let's be honest here, of all the briefs that have been written, there are only two briefs that have stayed within the scope of the question as presented by the Court. That would be the DOJ brief and Heller's brief.
While I believe the Court will rule for the respondents, I don't think it will go anywhere as far as some are hoping. I would be happy for the Court to simply say that the right is an individual right and that the D.C. Codes violate that right.
Such a decision would seem to imply that at least, Intermediate scrutiny is applied to Second Amendment cases.
And lastly, welcome to theFiringLine Kenneth and thank you for the needed information and the kind remarks about the nature of this thread.