Page 1 of 1

7th Cir: Old, non-violent felony conviction not bar to gun possession

Posted: Thu May 31, 2018 5:25 pm
by ELB
Hatfield v. Sessions (S.D. Ill., Apr. 26, 2018).
Plaintiff Larry Edward Hatfield wants to keep a gun in his home for self-defense. But the Government bans him from doing so, because 28 years ago, Hatfield lied on some forms that he sent to the Railroad Retirement Board: a felony in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a). Hatfield later pled guilty to one count of violating the statute, an offense for which he received no prison time and a meager amount in restitution fees pursuant to a formal plea agreement with the Government. Now, Hatfield brings this as-applied challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)—the statute that bans him from owning a gun—on the grounds that it violates his Second Amendment rights. Hatfield embeds his argument in United States v. Williams, 616 F.3d 685, 692 (7th Cir. 2010), which instructed that "[the Supreme Court's decision in D.C. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)] referred to felon disarmament bans only as `presumptively lawful,' which, by implication, means that there must exist the possibility that the ban could be unconstitutional in the face of an as-applied challenge." If there is any case that rebuts that presumption, it is this one. So for the following reasons, the Court GRANTS summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff Larry E. Hatfield.

Re: 7th Cir: Old, non-violent felony conviction not bar to gun possession

Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:14 am
by RHenriksen
:hurry:

Re: 7th Cir: Old, non-violent felony conviction not bar to gun possession

Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:10 pm
by TreyHouston
:shock: WOW!

Re: 7th Cir: Old, non-violent felony conviction not bar to gun possession

Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:27 pm
by The Annoyed Man
I think that is probably a good decision. I wonder if it will rest there, or if someone will pursue it to a higher court to get it overturned.

Re: 7th Cir: Old, non-violent felony conviction not bar to gun possession

Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:10 pm
by srothstein
This is a great decision. The opinion is well thought out and written, IMO.

But, I was particularly impressed with this paragraph:
And on a similar note, if the Court accepts the Government's position, it would lead to a harebrained outcome in which the Founders meant to allow Congress to inadvertently disarm the people by passing gobs of statutory felonies not contemplated at the common law, such as making a false statement (18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)); depositing merchandise in a building upon the boundary line between the United States and any foreign country (18 U.S.C. § 547); operating or holding any interest in a gambling establishment on a ship (18 U.S.C. § 1082); transporting lottery tickets across state lines when one state forbids lottery tickets (18 U.S.C. § 1301); mailing indecent matter on the outside of an envelope (18 U.S.C § 1463); possessing contraband smokeless tobacco (18 U.S.C. § 2342(a)); defacing any marks or numbers placed upon packages in a warehouse (18 U.S.C § 548); and more.
I have heard it claimed before, and it appears that this court might agree, that our government is passing laws to make us criminals so it can control us and take away our rights.