New plea to enter gun dispute
Five residents of the District of Columbia, seeking to join in the dispute in the Supreme Court over the city’s flat ban on private possession of handguns, argued on Tuesday that they should not have to depend upon another resident to make sure their legal rights are protected. The Court should hear their claim that the D.C. Circuit Court has gone far to bar local residents from pursuing civil rights claims in federal courts in the city.
This reply was the final filing in the initial stage of the appeal in Parker v. District of Columbia (07-335), the cross-petition to the city’s own appeal seeking to reinstate the handgun ban (District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290). Filings also have been completed on the city’s petition, so the cases are ready for distribution to the Justices for their initial reaction on whether to hear them.
The five named in the cross-petition were found not to have standing to join in the challenge to the gun ban. Only one resident, Dick Anthony Heller, was found to have a right to sue, because he sought a license for a handgun and was refused.
The others argued that their rights should not depend upon Heller staying in the case. They have their own concerns about limits on their rights as they see them under the Second Amendment, and they want to pursue those to “expand a judgment” in the Circuit Court that went in their favor on the constitutional question, the reply contended.
The Circuit Court, they said in arguments renewed from their cross-petition, has followed a doctrine on standing that sharply limits the rights of D.C. residents to seek pre-enforcement review of criminal laws directly affecting their rights.
It is amazing to me that how city, county, and State goverments in this country try to implement gun bans for whatever reasons! The Second Amendment is a very important piece to the puzzle! The citizens have an absolute right to defend themselves against criminals and a tyrannical goverment! Consider what our forefathers had just gone thru to place such importance they did on the gun issue! The constitution does not require special permission permits from goverment to carry a gun for protection!
Comment by Dan Cantrell — October 25, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
Really stinks that, with few exceptions, the only way you can challenge the constitutionality of a law is to first break the law (because otherwise the court will probably say you don’t have standing). You’re left in the unenviable situation of being a convicted criminal if you lose.
Comment by Chris Alexander — October 26, 2007 @ 12:26 am