The majority opinion also noted several other positive rulings. The first is that the government cannot ban an "entire class" of arms. This should end Chicago's handgun ban when it is challenged in the courts. There is also a likelihood that a ban on so-called 'assault weapons' would no longer pass muster. Some have even suggested this ruling negates the GCA of 1986 that no longer allows registering of select-fire weapons which have been manufactured since it was signed into law. It appears the GCA of 1936 will remain intact though since it is a tax - though requiring the local law enforcement to make an arbitrary decision on whether to sign-off on a Class III firearm could probably be challenged successfully. State prohibitions on Class III weapons may be vulnerable to repeal as well, as well as the .50 cal bans that exist in several states.
Second, while the ruling allows for some forms of licensing and registration, the process cannot be arbitrary. In other words, there must be plain, reasonable requirements spelled out for the licensing procedure, and those that meet the requirements must be issued a license. This most likely dooms a number of the gun control measures in places like NYC.
Third, the majority also recognized that the right can be restricted, but they didn't expand upon the restrictions that are already in place. For instance, they agreed that those adjudicated as mentally ill and convicted felons may be excluded from firearm ownership, and that government buildings, such as court houses or your local FBI field office, can forbid weapons on their premises.
Finally, one of the most legally relevant, and widely overlooked, parts of the this decision is pointed out by Alan Korwin over at the Buckeye Firearms Association:
The core issue of "judicial scrutiny" is now established -- better than we had dreamed -- in what will be known as Famous Footnote #27 (p56). Laws impinging on the Second Amendment can receive no lower level of review than any other "specific enumerated right" such as free speech, the guarantee against double jeopardy or the right to counsel (the Court's list of examples).Law suits were filed in San Francisco, Chicago, and several Chicago suburbs within hours of the decision. Now only time will tell how many of these unconstitutional restrictions on law-abiding citizens will be overturned.
**See the complete ruling here**
No comments:
Post a Comment