SAF @2AFDN 25 minutes ago18 May 2015 | News & Releases
BELLEVUE, WA - The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) today won a preliminary injunction against the District of Columbia and Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy Lanier's enforcement of a requirement to provide a "good reason" when applying for a concealed carry permit.
Judge Frederick J. Scullin ordered that the city is "enjoined from denying handgun carry licenses to applicants who meet the requirements of D.C. Code 22-4506(a) and all other current requirements for the possession and carrying of handguns under District of Columbia law."
Judge Scullin further wrote in his 23-page opinion that the District's "good reason/proper reason" requirement "has far more than a 'de minimis' effect on [their] rights it completely bars the right from being exercised, at all times and places and in any manner, without exception" and that the requirement "impinges on Plaintiff's Second Amendment right to bear arms.'
“We’re thoroughly reviewing the decision, looking at our options,†said Robert Marus, a spokesman for D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine. “The first option would be to ask Judge Scullin to stay his order pending an appeal,†Marus added.
The ruling guts a law that was passed in September that allowed police to use discretion in granting licenses to D.C. residents who applied to carry concealed firearms in public. Applicants had to show “good reason to fear injury to his or her person or property†or “any other proper reason for carrying a pistol,†such as employment transporting cash or other valuables.â€
D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D), who drafted the law with mayoral and police officials, said Tuesday that lawmakers trod “very carefully†when they wrote the legislation, and that he believed the language of it remains “constitutionally defensible.â€
“I would hope that we would appeal the decision,†he said.
May 28, 2015 12:00 pm
A federal judge on Thursday denied the District of Columbia's request for an immediate administrative stay on a ruling declaring part of the city's gun carry law unconstitutional.
In a ruling issued on May 18th, Judge Frederick J. Scullin said the District's requirement that applicants for a gun carry permit demonstrate a "good reason" to carry a gun violated the Second Amendment. The DC Attorney General's Office filed a request on May 26 for an immediate administrative stay in order to avoid issuing permits to those denied under the "good reason" clause while they filed an appeal.
Thurday's order rejects that request and schedules a July 7 hearing on whether to grant a long-term stay pending the city's appeal of the May 18 decision.
It's almost as if "shall not be infringed" had some meaning.D.C. just got b*t*h slapped by Judge Scullin again!
John Richardson @jpr9954 7 minutes ago
District Of Columbia Doesn't Get Its Stay http://dlvr.it/B0tVSH
Federal Judge Denies DC’s Request to Immediately Stay Gun Ruling
Hearing on long-term stay scheduled for July 7
http://freebeacon.com/issues/federal-judge-denies-dcs-request-to-immediately-stay-gun-ruling/
27 May 2015 | News & Releases
BELLEVUE, WA - The Second Amendment Foundation is asking the federal court to force the District of Columbia to abide by a May 18 ruling requiring the city to drop its requirement to show a "good reason" before issuing concealed carry permits, or find the city in contempt.
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an emergency administrative stay of a ruling against the current gun carry law in Washington, D.C., on Friday.
The stay allows the city to continue enforcing the "good reason" clause contained within the law while the court considers whether or not to grant a long-term stay covering the length of city's appeal.
The "good reason" clause, which was ruled unconstitutional by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on May 18, lets D.C. police chief Cathy Lanier decide whether applicants have a good reason to carry a firearm. The city has said it does not consider high crime rates or a general desire for self-defense applicable reasons under their law.
The Circuit Court made clear in its order that the stay did not constitute a judgment on the merits of the case against the city's law or a sign of whether or not it might grant a long term stay on the District Court's ruling. "The purpose of this administrative stay is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of the motion for stay and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that motion," the order said.
Maybe if government gets too overbearing, government will allow the people to have arms? Is that really what they think the 2A meant? They seem to want to rule out everything else.Circuit Court Issues Stay on Lower Court’s D.C. Gun Carry Ruling
Stay allows controversial ‘good reason’ clause to go back into effect
http://freebeacon.com/issues/circuit-court-issues-stay-on-lower-courts-d-c-gun-carry-ruling/
The “good reason†clause, which was ruled unconstitutional by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on May 18, lets D.C. police chief Cathy Lanier decide whether applicants have a good reason to carry a firearm. The city has said it does not consider high crime rates or a general desire for self-defense applicable reasons under their law.
No, they think it means they can ban guns. However a judge had said no, you must allow carry, so they went for this other way to not allow carry.Maybe if government gets too overbearing, government will allow the people to have arms? Is that really what they think the 2A meant? They seem to want to rule out everything else.
They pass gun control laws. We say the laws are unconstitutional. The judge says no it doesn't infringe the second amendment, and there are no repercussions.No, they think it means they can ban guns. However a judge had said no, you must allow carry, so they went for this other way to not allow carry.
That's why I believe every judge should be elected not appointed!They pass gun control laws. We say the laws are unconstitutional. The judge says no it doesn't infringe the second amendment, and there are no repercussions.
February 9, 2016 12:17 pm
WASHINGTON (AP) - A new judge has been assigned to oversee a case about the District of Columbia's strict gun laws.
Online records show the case was assigned Tuesday to Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who was appointed to the federal bench in Washington in 1997 by President Bill Clinton.
Kollar-Kotelly replaces Judge Frederick Scullin Jr., who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush. Scullin's initial ruling in the case had been in favor of the gun law's challengers.
In December, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that Scullin should not have been overseeing the case.
