Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
The case is United States v. Mazarella. The defendant was arrested in a sting on illegal firearms trafficking (selling .25ACP Titan pistols) and convicted of possession of a handgun with an obliterated serial number. He challenged the conviction on Second Amendment grounds.
The Third Circuit defined the core right protected by Heller as "the right of law-abiding citizens to possess non-dangerous (i.e. not the dangerous or unusual weapons mentioned in Heller) weapons for self-defense in the home." The Third Circuit also mentions that to some degree it must protect the right of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms for "other, as yet undefined, lawful purposes"
Relying on the "dangerous and unusual" language from Heller, the Third Circuit determined that an unmarked firearm is outside the scope of the Second Amendment; but that even if it was, the regulation in question would survive both strict scrutiny and intermediate scrutiny (though they suggested only intermediate scrutiny applied).
Good discussion at the Volokh Conspiracy, as usual.
The Third Circuit defined the core right protected by Heller as "the right of law-abiding citizens to possess non-dangerous (i.e. not the dangerous or unusual weapons mentioned in Heller) weapons for self-defense in the home." The Third Circuit also mentions that to some degree it must protect the right of law-abiding citizens to possess firearms for "other, as yet undefined, lawful purposes"
Relying on the "dangerous and unusual" language from Heller, the Third Circuit determined that an unmarked firearm is outside the scope of the Second Amendment; but that even if it was, the regulation in question would survive both strict scrutiny and intermediate scrutiny (though they suggested only intermediate scrutiny applied).
Good discussion at the Volokh Conspiracy, as usual.