DC Rejects Handgun Application

[WarHawk-AVG]

Shouldn't they be held in contempt of court, jailed and removed from power?

[57Coastie]

It's not the guns that are dangerous, it's the lawyers! (sorry Chas.)

Actually, it was non-attorney elected officials of D.C. that trampled constitutional rights and lawyers that restored them.

Chas.

Jim

[57Coastie]

Shouldn't they be held in contempt of court, jailed and removed from power?

I tried above, unsuccessfully, to explain that nobody in the DC government has done anything (in this case failed to obey a court order) which opens them up to being held in contempt of court -- yet. We should not expect that to happen until a court order is disobeyed.

Chas. of course suggests sanctions might ensue, another alternative, and I certainly do not disagree with him, but knowing the DC District Court as I do, I suspect that so long as DC's efforts can arguably be considered bona fide, while unwilling, attempts to comply with the Heller decision, and the members of the council stop stupidly admitting in public that they know they are doing something suspect, then we probably should not hold our breath.

I agree with KB's suggestion that DC can be expected to push the envelope just as far as it can, one baby-step at a time, until they go too far and get their toes stepped on. This is just the way our great system of constitutional government, with its checks and balances, works. The courts do not yet govern DC.

There is another possible player, here, of course, and that is the U. S. Congress, the real governor of DC, and they haven't been heard from yet. Given the way our Constitution sets out the government of DC in Art. 1, Sec. 8, is not the Congress equally derelict here as is the DC Council? Just an idle thought.

Jim

[stevie_d_64]

There is another possible player, here, of course, and that is the U. S. Congress, the real governor of DC, and they haven't been heard from yet. Given the way our Constitution sets out the government of DC in Art. 1, Sec. 8, is not the Congress equally derelict here as is the DC Council? Just an idle thought.

That is an interesting thought...But the Congress is only transient in nature within the district...And the only reason they are there is because they are elected to represent us in that district...Its like being in the military, you may be stationed somewhere as a part of your duty, but you still have a "home of record" that trumps most situations, not all of them, but some...

[KBCraig]

I can not imagine the arrogance needed to refuse to comply with an order of the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

With respect, in Heller the Supreme Court did not "order" the District of Columbia to register Mr. Hellers handgun(s). This may be considered nit-picking, but it is a very important nit, if we hope to really understand what has happened, and what is likely to happen next, in the judicial system.

IANAL, but Ah kin read purty good.

Explain for me, please, your statement in light of the Court's holding (p.64):
In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun
possession in the home violates the Second Amendment,
as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful fire-
arm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate
self-defense. Assuming that Heller is not disqualified
from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the Dis-
trict must permit him to register his handgun and must
issue him a license to carry it in the home.
....
We affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

It is so ordered.

[FlynJay]

The House has already spoken on this matter. It never made it to the senate floor for a vote though.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/dcguns.htm

[57Coastie]

I can not imagine the arrogance needed to refuse to comply with an order of the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

With respect, in Heller the Supreme Court did not "order" the District of Columbia to register Mr. Hellers handgun(s). This may be considered nit-picking, but it is a very important nit, if we hope to really understand what has happened, and what is likely to happen next, in the judicial system.

IANAL, but Ah kin read purty good.

Explain for me, please, your statement in light of the Court's holding (p.64):
In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun
possession in the home violates the Second Amendment,
as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful fire-
arm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate
self-defense. Assuming that Heller is not disqualified
from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the Dis-
trict must permit him to register his handgun and must
issue him a license to carry it in the home.
....
We affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

It is so ordered.

KB,

The only firearm in issue before the Supreme Court was Mr. Heller's 9-shot revolver, and it appears that DC is moving ahead, albeit slowly, to register that revolver and to issue him a license to carry it in his home. While I certainly do not know all the details, at the moment DC appears to be complying with the literal command of the Court's judgment, and most knowledgeable commentators expect Mr. Heller to receive his registration and license for that revolver in due course.

The Court took care, you will note in your quotation, that it is entirely possible, while perhaps unlikely, that Mr. Heller might, for example, be found for the first time, rightly or wrongly, to have been convicted of a violent felony, and, if so, DC may even now deny him his registration and license. How the Court's decision applies to any other firearms, owned or possessed by any other individual, or even Mr. Heller himself (for example, his semiautomatic handgun) remains to be seen, and, given DC's apparent intent to stall, those cases will require other lawsuits to be filed. If such lawsuits follow Mr. Heller's (or if he succeeds in getting the issue of his semiautomatic before the DC authorities without risking going to jail) and registration and licensing are denied, the applicant may bring a lawsuit in the District Court of the District of Columbia, as Mr. Heller did. If the District Court rules in favor of the applicant that court will order DC to issue the registration and license; DC can appeal to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; and the "loser" in the Circuit Court can appeal to the Supreme Court; and here we go again.

It is my guess, and just a guess, that DC will issue Mr. Heller his registration and license, but only for his 9-shot revolver, and that DC will continue to put roadblocks in the way of further applications until the District Court either slaps DC good or the Circuit Court or the Supreme Court orders that DC be slapped. As our knowledgeable mentor and moderator, Chas., has suggested, this is the point where I would think sanctions might come into play and, hopefully, DC would undertake to change its laws/regulations in such a way that it will start going down the path laid out by the Supreme Court in its opinion.

Jim

[57Coastie]

The House has already spoken on this matter. It never made it to the senate floor for a vote though.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/dcguns.htm

It should also be noted here, TX, that 55 Senators and 250 Representatives, a bi-partisan group of legislators, representing more than half of the U.S. Congress, signed on to an amicus curiae brief in the Heller case in favor of Mr. Heller. If these guys put their votes where their mouths are this issue might get settled rather quickly.

Jim

[flintknapper]

The only firearm in issue before the Supreme Court was Mr. Heller's 9-shot revolver, and it appears that DC is moving ahead, albeit slowly, to register that revolver and to issue him a license to carry it in his home. While I certainly do not know all the details, at the moment DC appears to be complying with the literal command of the Court's judgment, and most knowledgeable commentators expect Mr. Heller to receive his registration and license for that revolver in due course.

The Court took care, you will note in your quotation, that it is entirely possible, while perhaps unlikely, that Mr. Heller might, for example, be found for the first time, rightly or wrongly, to have been convicted of a violent felony, and, if so, DC may even now deny him his registration and license. How the Court's decision applies to any other firearms, owned or possessed by any other individual, or even Mr. Heller himself (for example, his semiautomatic handgun) remains to be seen, and, given DC's apparent intent to stall, those cases will require other lawsuits to be filed. If such lawsuits follow Mr. Heller's (or if he succeeds in getting the issue of his semiautomatic before the DC authorities without risking going to jail) and registration and licensing are denied, the applicant may bring a lawsuit in the District Court of the District of Columbia, as Mr. Heller did. If the District Court rules in favor of the applicant that court will order DC to issue the registration and license; DC can appeal to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; and the "loser" in the Circuit Court can appeal to the Supreme Court; and here we go again.

It is my guess, and just a guess, that DC will issue Mr. Heller his registration and license, but only for his 9-shot revolver, and that DC will continue to put roadblocks in the way of further applications until the District Court either slaps DC good or the Circuit Court or the Supreme Court orders that DC be slapped. As our knowledgeable mentor and moderator, Chas., has suggested, this is the point where I would think sanctions might come into play and, hopefully, DC would undertake to change its laws/regulations in such a way that it will start going down the path laid out by the Supreme Court in its opinion.

So basically, the Court is going to "count to ten" before requiring it's unruly child (D.C.) to comply with a plain and simple command.


That would never fly in my home.

[57Coastie]

So basically, the Court is going to "count to ten" before requiring it's unruly child (D.C.) to comply with a plain and simple command.

1. The Court's one command appears to be on the way to being obeyed. DC has neither failed to comply with that one command (with respect, again, only to Mr. Heller's revolver) nor has it yet shown credible evidence that it may not comply with that command.

2. The DC local goverrnment is not the child of the Supreme Court -- it is the child of the U. S. Congress. The U. S. Congress could abolish the current DC local government in its totality overnight and take on the function to itself, as provided in the Constitution, rather than delegating it to its current power structure. I wonder how many readers think that would improve things in general?

3. I guaran-darn-tee you that if the Supreme Court took upon itself the role of governing the American people this forum would blast cyberspace with whining, complaining, and cries for impeachment, and rightly so.

This is the way our system, thank the Good Lord, works. It may be slow, but somehow it has so far largely worked out just fine. It took almost 220 years for the Supreme Court to decide what they did in Heller (which I guess I have to stress again and again, was very limited), so, yes, we are going to have to be a little patient.

The Court, in Heller, went way beyond what it actually decided about Mr. Heller's revolver, and gave us some hints about how it would likely rule with respect to some other isssues if they were to come before them. One of the strengths of our judicial system is that appellate courts, following Great Britain's example, go on beyond just a one-word decision, i.e., "affirmed," or "reversed." They go on this way, not to decide those other issues which are not yet before them, but rather to make our law at least somewhat predictable, so we can order our affairs of all kinds, including gun ownership and possession, in such a way as not to be disappointed later, and hopefully to avoid some future lawsuits. It is sometimes unfortunate, however, when, as in Heller, courts "go on" by using language which sounds like they are already deciding issues not then before them, and when they do this they often upset the apple cart, often because when those broad issues do come before them there is a slight difference in the particular case which causes it to go the other way -- and then they are accused of flip-flopping, to use an expression much in use today in a different context.

With respect,

Jim

[stevie_d_64]

The Court, in Heller, went way beyond what it actually decided about Mr. Heller's revolver, and gave us some hints about how it would likely rule with respect to some other issues if they were to come before them.

Assuring the District of Columbia and the rest of the country, that this particular court will not see another 2nd Amendment case come before them again with this particular line up...

In regards to D.C. balking lately in its attempt to further circumvent the Constitution, the law and much less the Supreme Court, proves that its going to take some rather abrupt and drastic action(s) by someone(s) to correct their (D.C.'s) unlawful and negligent (possibly criminal) position on this issue...

The problem with us, is that we are down here in Texas, and those folks up in D.C., that feel like we do about all of this, are too few, and possibly unwilling to press the issue...At this particular time...

[57Coastie]

The problem with us, is that we are down here in Texas, and those folks up in D.C., that feel like we do about all of this, are too few, and possibly unwilling to press the issue...At this particular time...

I think there is indeed something we down here in Texas can do, and this was reinforced just a few moments ago when I received one of the recurring NRA heads-up emails, which I am sure is true for many of you, which contains the following paragraph:

"Without Congress' intervention, D.C. can violate the intent of the Heller decision indefinitely. That is because under 'Home Rule,' D.C.'s emergency bills are not subject to review by Congress, and D.C. can reinstitute 'emergency' laws every 90 days. The city's officials are already thumbing their noses at the Supreme Court."

This may reflect that the NRA is perhaps thinking about recommending that the Congress get involved in the DC situation, as it is fully empowered to do. This is not an easy decision, I am sure. While I certainly agree, as I pointed out above, that getting the Congress to act is probably the fastest way to sort DC out, it has been demonsltrated time and time again that Congress can always screw up a free lunch, or, as Annoyed Man's lovely daughter would put it, cause their cure to be MUBAR ("messed up beyond all relief").

Anyway, we down in Texas can always send those cards, letters and emails off to our senators and congresspersons, soliciting them to use their valid power to end the city's officials' "thumbing their noses at the Supreme Court," as put by the NRA. On the other hand, a little patience might be in order while we wait to see whether the NRA takes a firm position on this, so that those with our thinking can take nationwide unified action.

Jim

[flintknapper]

So basically, the Court is going to "count to ten" before requiring it's unruly child (D.C.) to comply with a plain and simple command.

1. The Court's one command appears to be on the way to being obeyed. DC has neither failed to comply with that one command (with respect, again, only to Mr. Heller's revolver) nor has it yet shown credible evidence that it may not comply with that command.

Unless I am mistaken, DC continues to require that long-rifles and shotguns be rendered inoperable. How do we reconcile that with this:

In sum, we hold that the District’s ban on handgun
possession in the home violates the Second Amendment,
as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful fire-
arm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate
self-defense. Assuming that Heller is not disqualified
from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the Dis-
trict must permit him to register his handgun and must
issue him a license to carry it in the home.
....
We affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.

It is so ordered.

2. The DC local goverrnment is not the child of the Supreme Court -- it is the child of the U. S. Congress. The U. S. Congress could abolish the current DC local government in its totality overnight and take on the function to itself, as provided in the Constitution, rather than delegating it to its current power structure. I wonder how many readers think that would improve things in general?

The Supreme Courts decisions regarding the law is binding upon all citizens, by default we are all "their children" (an analogy) with respect to the duty of following their decision(s).

My point is that DC clearly intends to be dragged kicking and screaming the entire way. The duty of elected officials is to perform their jobs in the most expedient manner possible, if they can't do this...then they need to be replaced. If the people of DC will not replace them, then they are getting what they deserve (as is the case in New Orleans).



My .02 on it.

Flint.

[Liberty]

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me. If I don't follow a court order, They will send me to jail. Why isn't the Chief of police and the city council arrested and allowed to spend some time with KB and associates. These guys are in contempt of the highest court of the land, and they are free to walk the streets. Tossing these treasonous sons of dogs into jail would waken the rest of the politicians up to the concepts of the Bill of Rights.

[57Coastie]

I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me. If I don't follow a court order, They will send me to jail. Why isn't the Chief of police and the city council arrested and allowed to spend some time with KB and associates. These guys are in contempt of the highest court of the land, and they are free to walk the streets. Tossing these treasonous sons of dogs into jail would waken the rest of the politicians up to the concepts of the Bill of Rights.

It is time that I back out of this, as my continued efforts to show that nobody has been shown to disobey any court order are fruitless.

Here is what we have seen in this case in the way of court orders:

1. The U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered Mr. Heller's lawsuit to be dismissed. Mr. Heller appealed.

2. The U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed the District Court and ordered the District Court (not DC) to grant Mr. Heller a summary judgment granting his prayer for relief (that his 9-shot revolver be registered and licensed for possession in his home for the purpose of self-defense). DC appealed.

3. The U. S. Supreme Court ordered that the judgment of the Court of Appeals be affirmed.

Three court orders.

The second order, by the Court of Appeals is now again in effect.

If DC does not issue the registration and license for the revolver within a reasonable period of time, whatever that is (perhaps another question for the courts to face??) the District Court will issue that judgment and will most likely along with it issue an order to the DC authorities to issue the registration and license for the revolver (the court may well issue the judgment and order in any event).

In closing, and I really mean closing, I cannot use the IANAL copout. I have been admitted to the bar of the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia and the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit for 42 years. Before my fairly recent retirement I was a practicing trial lawyer, trial judge and appellate judge. I hasten to add that this makes me no smarter than any other member of this forum, but I would hope that it demonstrates that I may know a bit about procedures of the courts of the District of Columbia. I got involved in this in an effort to answer some good honest questions. I have tried to do so, and of course I have done some hopefully advised speculation (equals "guesses"). Some have listened; at times my efforts have fallen on deaf ears. So be it. I've not won them all, and I never expected to.

With the greatest respect to all assembled here,

Jim