Posted on 10/07/2017 8:33:39 AM PDT by marktwain
The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has refused to grant a petition for an en banc hearing in the Wrenn v. D.C. Second Amendment case.
The Court earlier ruled that the requirement for a “good cause” to issue a concealed carry permit was unconstitutional.
In effect, this means in a week the District of Columbia will become a “shall issue” jurisdiction. If a person meets the legal requirements for a concealed carry permit, the District of Columbia will be required to issue a permit.
None of the 10 Circuit judges capable of requesting a vote for an en banc hearing did so.
Garland, Chief Judge; Henderson, Rogers, Tatel, Griffith, Kavanaugh, Srinivasan, Millett, Pillard, and Wilkins*, Circuit Judges; Williams, Senior Circuit Judge
Upon consideration of the petitions of the District of Columbia, et al., for rehearing en banc, the joint response thereto; and the absence of a request by any member of the court for a vote; the motions of Everytown for Gun Safety for invitation to file briefs as amicus curiae in support of the petitions for rehearing en banc and the lodged briefs, it is ORDERED that the motions be granted. The Clerk is directed to file the lodged documents. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the petitions be denied.
* Circuit Judge Wilkins did not participate in these matters.
Circuit Judge Karen Henderson was on the three judge panel that heard the case. She was the dissenting opinion in Wrenn v. D.C. She did not request an en banc hearing. Alan Gura, the prominent Second Amendment attorney, had this to say:
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
The timing sucks — but this will be useful in California, Oregon, Maryland, etc. in about 2 months.
“The Court earlier ruled that the requirement for a “good cause” to issue a concealed carry permit was unconstitutional.”
“to issue a concealed carry permit was unconstitutional.”
You can have a right, or a permit. Not both.
Alan Gura is such a rock star when it comes to these things. So glad he’s on our side.
The “little people” win one...for a change.
New Jersey, where I live, is also a “Shall Issue” state...but just try to get a carry permit. Impossible.
Backers of the challenge felt D.C. sacrificed their gun law so other states with similar practices could hang on to theirs.
This needs to go to SCOTUS and settled once and for all.
>>But just try to get a carry permit. Impossible.<<
Sue accordingly.
This Ping List is for all things pertaining to the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Keep and BEAR arms
NO permit needed period
Only 8 "may issue" states remain, which essentially means "no issue" for all but politically connected people -- CA, NY, NJ, MA, RI, DE, MD, HA.
The overall quality of articles on this site is going down, down, down. Videos only article without active links, unformatted excerpts, incomplete excerpts, misleading excerpts and more.
If you are going to excerpt, why not include what Gura said, stead of forcing the readers here to “click through”.
“May Issue...”: Anti-Constitutional RAT strongholds.
I thought Jersey worded it “May Issue”?
Sounds like another lawsuit.
I used to contribute to NRA but they refuse to push the issue in NJ so I told them to eff off without my money.
From what I’ve heard, California varies greatly depending on the county where you live. Large urban counties are very tight on issuing while more rural counties are much more reasonable, if not CCW-friendly.
No state should be a ‘may issue’ state as long as they are part of these United States living under the same constitution and bill of rights as the rest of us.
Brunettes make better lovers .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.