Puerto Rico is a tough place to be a gun owner. The NRA and SAF don't have much reach there, and the Commonwealth is often a laboratory in which folks test whether or not certain laws would fly on the mainland.
Antonio A. Hernández Almodóvar has argued against some of Puerto Rico's more restrictive firearms laws, but until 2011, the courts have been less than sympathetic. That changed with the Supreme Court's rulings in Heller and McDonald.
I'd heard about his winning streak, but no translations of the decisions had been made available, and it's best not to trust Google or Babelfish for these things. This morning, he forwarded me his translations of two cases.
The first is Gunsmiths Association of Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Puerto Rico, reversing a lower court decision that failed to take incorporation into account. It also calls for intermediate to strict scrutiny in examining gun-control laws.
Under the "emergency regulations" clause of Regulations 7472 (an amendment to amendment 7311 of the Puerto Rico Weapons Act) , the Police Superintendent was refusing to issue permits to gunsmiths. The CFI (Court of First Intent) originally found that his use of such authority was not capricious for several reasons, including the idea that the 2nd Amendment "does not apply to the States or territories nor does it affect the power thereof to regulate the possession of arms.”
This ruling finds that the lower court erred, and it goes on to assert that restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms must pass heightened judicial scrutiny.
This echoes Judge Syke's opinon in US v Skoien, in which the 7th Circuit found that restrictions on the RKBA must be held to intermediate scrutiny at the lightest.
The second case is ex parte Roque César Nido-Lanausse, in which they found that the RKBA could no longer be treated as a privilege. They also state that a scheme requiring an applicant to prove “fear for his/her safety” to qualify for a carry permit.
This comports with Judge Legg's opinion in the Maryland District Court that,
While I'm not sure if these cases will be quoted or used in further proceedings, but that these decisions came from an otherwise hostile jurisdiction is encouraging.
Antonio A. Hernández Almodóvar has argued against some of Puerto Rico's more restrictive firearms laws, but until 2011, the courts have been less than sympathetic. That changed with the Supreme Court's rulings in Heller and McDonald.
I'd heard about his winning streak, but no translations of the decisions had been made available, and it's best not to trust Google or Babelfish for these things. This morning, he forwarded me his translations of two cases.
The first is Gunsmiths Association of Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Puerto Rico, reversing a lower court decision that failed to take incorporation into account. It also calls for intermediate to strict scrutiny in examining gun-control laws.
Under the "emergency regulations" clause of Regulations 7472 (an amendment to amendment 7311 of the Puerto Rico Weapons Act) , the Police Superintendent was refusing to issue permits to gunsmiths. The CFI (Court of First Intent) originally found that his use of such authority was not capricious for several reasons, including the idea that the 2nd Amendment "does not apply to the States or territories nor does it affect the power thereof to regulate the possession of arms.”
This ruling finds that the lower court erred, and it goes on to assert that restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms must pass heightened judicial scrutiny.
This echoes Judge Syke's opinon in US v Skoien, in which the 7th Circuit found that restrictions on the RKBA must be held to intermediate scrutiny at the lightest.
The second case is ex parte Roque César Nido-Lanausse, in which they found that the RKBA could no longer be treated as a privilege. They also state that a scheme requiring an applicant to prove “fear for his/her safety” to qualify for a carry permit.
This comports with Judge Legg's opinion in the Maryland District Court that,
While I'm not sure if these cases will be quoted or used in further proceedings, but that these decisions came from an otherwise hostile jurisdiction is encouraging.