Louisiana constitutional amendment

M

mayosligo

New member
Thought this was worth some discussion as it seems Louisiana will be the first to add this language. Beyond making the language tougher I am not sure what else it safeguards against.

Proposed improvements to Article 1, Section 11 of the Louisiana Constitution, known as the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Amendment, would amend the Louisiana Constitution to state: “The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms is fundamental and shall not be infringed. Any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.” If Amendment 2 is accepted by the voters on November 6, Louisiana will have the strongest guarantee of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the nation.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/s...-bear-arms-in-louisiana–vote-“yes”-on-2!.aspx
 
Strict Scrutiny is a BIG deal. It severely limits the governments ability to restrict a fundamental right. It is the standard for fundamental rights. Explicitly including that phrase firmly place the RKBA in the category of Fundamental Right.

Words like "infringed" have ambiguous meaning. Strict Scrutiny places a very high standard of compelling reason and minimal interference on any "infringement".
 
Hello zincwarrior,,,

State laws won't trump federal laws however.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone thinks it will trump federal laws,,,
Nor do I believe that was their intent.

From what I have read it is Louisiana's way to ensure that their local municipalities can't enact laws stronger than what the State has in effect.

Aarond

.
 
I think it goes even beyond that, Aarond.

The requirements of Strict Scrutiny would apply to the state levels laws. I'm no lawyer, but to my understanding the very act of expressly applying Strict Scrutiny to firearms laws very nearly makes a Protected Class out of guns owners.

Strict Scrutiny gives the government the burden of proof. The necessity of the law. Any law is essentially PRESUMED to be invalid until proven otherwise. The government has to prove a compelling public interest.

Even if the government proves the necessity of the law, it is still essentially considered a burden on a fundamental right and the law must be tailored so as to be as absolutely narrow as possible, to limit the burden to the least possible level necessary to accomplish the compelling interest.

Scrict Scrutiny is not applied to any "normal" laws. It is reserved to issues of fundamental rights and protected classes. It puts the RKBA on the same level as the right to vote, free press and religion.
 
I have to wonder how this will work out. The legislature is crossing boundaries with this. It's unusual to see legislators place the standard for review in the law using terms of the Supreme Court's own creation. A determination of what constitutes a fundamental right is usually the court's jurisprudence. I have to ponder whether or not a court might simply ignore that portion of the law that tells them how to review it. Then again, things in Louisiana are different (French civil law and all that) so it might work. Who knows.
 
Absent being a violation of the state's own constitutional or federal law, their court system can't ignore it legally. In reality courts are known for doing what they want though.
 
Being that it's a constitutional amendment, it would difficult for it to be unconstitutional. It is possible but I believe it would have to be found to have either been created/passed inappropriately or be itself a violation of some other protected class type law.
 
I guess the bigger concern is whether or not the legislature defined strict scrutiny in the amendment or the constitution. If not, what happens when the SCOTUS changes their definition of strict scrutiny?
 
Aarondgraham said:
From what I have read it is Louisiana's way to ensure that their local municipalities can't enact laws stronger than what the State has in effect.
Click to expand...
???

It doesn't use the word "preempt," and it doesn't say anything about localities not enacting firearms laws/ordinances. So it can't stop a municipality or parish (what Louisiana uses for counties) from enacting a law that goes beyond what the state has in place.
 
Im glad to see what happened before will not happen again, at least not there. Hopefully never anywhere else in our country, but i doubt it.
 
Another prof prefers to fight for his life by IPAD frisbee-fu.
Click to expand...
He actually used the phrase "Jindal Machine." Hrm. This part pretty much wrecks Sherman's credibility as a debater:

Amendment No. 2 is a lawyer’s paradise and a citizen’s hell. Riser’s retrograde bill now on the ballot makes me wonder if he’s just trying to drum up business for his funeral home. What a nasty way to increase profits.
Click to expand...

In any case, I think it's a novel idea. If it passes, I guarantee it will be challenged, and the courts will have to answer the question of whether or not the RKBA is protected by the same standard of scrutiny as, say, political speech.

If so, the barn door's open.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top