Federal Court rules Wilmington Housing Authority ban on open carry is Constitutional

[Frank Ettin]

Just another District Court (trial court level) decision. Thus far, the thread court judges, except in Maryland, have been ruling against us in the "carrying outside the home" cases.

This is all just part of the preliminaries.

 

[Al Norris]

The case is #53. Doe v. Wilmington Housing Authority et al.

The docket is here and the opinion is here.

ETA: Merged new thread with old thread and changed thread title.

 

[Tom Servo]

Thanks, Al!

According to the court, Heller protects the possession and use of a firearm in the home. The court finds that "home" is an area from which a person exerts ownership and may exclude others. They find that the common areas in question do not qualify as "home."

One good note is on page 29, regarding the level of scrutiny required. The Brady Campaign argued for a "reasonable regulation" test, which the court finds lacking.

Given the Third Circuit's application of intermediate scrutiny in Mazzarella, the Court concludes that the reasonable regulation test does not provide enough protection of the Second Amendment rights that are assumed to be at issue.

They find that, as time, place and manner regulations on 1st Amendment speech are acceptable, so they are with the 2nd.

I don't particularly like the decision, but I can see how the Court ended up there.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...The court finds that "home" is an area from which a person exerts ownership and may exclude others. They find that the common areas in question do not qualify as "home."...

And that, standing alone, isn't an unreasonable or unsupportable conclusion. It is consistent with the principles of property law applicable in many contexts and for many purposes.

The case really needs to be understood in terms of the right to bear arms outside the home -- which is arguably also protected under the Second Amendment and as was so found in Heller and McDonald.