Professors Lawsuit Against Campus Carry Rejected by Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Gun Watch ^ | 21 August, 2018 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Image by Kate at Victorygirlsblog.com

A longshot appeal to the Fifth Circuit, to stop Texas Campus carry, has been rejected by a unanimous three judge panel of the Court.  Three professors at the University of Texas had filed the case on novel grounds. From uscourts.gov: 

Three professors from the University of Texas at Austin challenged a Texas law permitting the concealed carry of handguns on campus and a corresponding University policy prohibiting professors from banning such weapons in their classrooms. The professors argued that the law and policy violate the First Amendment, Second Amendment, and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court dismissed the claims.

We AFFIRM.

Two years ago, in July of 2016, three academics associated with the University of Texas sued the Texas AG, Ken Paxton, and several University of Texas officials. They were desperately attempting to stop the start of Campus carry in Texas, where some students who had Texas carry permits were allowed to carry personal defensive firearms on campus. The firearms had to be concealed.

A year later,  Judge Lee Yeakel dismissed the case, on the grounds that the defendants had not suffered any harm. Therefore they had no standing to sue. The professors decided to appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.  All of the professors are women. One, Dr. Glass, is a Liberal Arts Professor. The other two, Dr. Lisa Moore and Dr. Mia Carter, are professors of English. That may explain their ability to construct the novel arguments used in the case . From mystatesman.com:

Jennifer Lynn Glass, Lisa Moore and Mia Carter argued that their First Amendment right to academic freedom has been violated because free speech is chilled in classrooms out of concern that someone might be carrying a concealed handgun.

They also contended that their Second Amendment rights have been infringed because firearm usage is not sufficiently “well-regulated.” And they said their right to equal protection under the 14th Amendment has been violated because UT lacks a rational basis for deciding where concealed carry is permitted.

A three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously rejected all those arguments Thursday, upholding the July 2017 dismissal of the case by U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel of Austin.

At the Fifth Circuit, the three judge panel dismissed the appeal because merely claiming you are frightened of a possible outcome does not violate First Amendment protections. The Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, not the right of the state to restrict individuals from keeping and bearing arms.

The Fourteen Amendment claim was dismissed under "rational basis", which the Professors had admitted was the correct level of scrutiny for their claim  They said there was no rational basis for regulations of the University of Texas, insisted on by the State of Texas, which found that concealed carry could be restricted on some places in the University campus, such as research laboratories, but not others.  They claimed different regulations on private universities versus public universities, violated equal protection under the law.

The Fifth Circuit panel stated it was easy to find a rational basis for such disparities, such as the protection of private property rights at private universities.

Now the professors will evaluate if they wish to expend more treasure and time to ask for an en banc hearing of the entire Fifth Circuit. An en banc hearing would be voted on by the entire Fifth Circuit. If approved, the entire Circuit would hear the case.

I expect the entire Fifth Circuit would uphold the dismissal by the three judge panel. The opinion is well argued, and rests on solid precedent. The professors have the option of appealing to the Supreme Court. With the impending appointment of Judge Kavanaugh by President Trump to the Supreme Court, a successful Supreme Court appeal appears less likely.

©2018 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included.

Gun Watch

[marktwain]

The lawsuit to stop campus carry was a fantasy from the start. A Supreme Court appointed by Hillary Clinton might approved of it.

[Mr. K]

So now this is “law of the land”, right?

Just like ‘gay marriage’ became law of the land by judicial decision??

[Pearls Before Swine]

They were also stupid for not figuring a way to get this to the Ninth Circuit. Of course being in Texas precluded that, and another precedent for campus carry has been set.

[Army Air Corps]

Ah, UT professors. Colour me not surprised at all.

[Yo-Yo]

They also contended that their Second Amendment rights have been infringed because firearm usage is not sufficiently “well-regulated.” And they said their right to equal protection under the 14th Amendment has been violated because UT lacks a rational basis for deciding where concealed carry is permitted.

The plaintiff's theory was laughable from the start. Exercising my Second Amendment rights violates your Second Amendment rights?

[NonValueAdded]

Sounds like the English Profs don’t understand the meaning of well-regulated.

[mabarker1]

Well of course it does.

If You had just finished off the 347th Bong Hit of the Lunch Hour you would think like they did...

[LIConFem]

Why are they all carrying little statues of Brennan?

[mabarker1]

I’ve got one question. What’s up with the Pic of the Dildo Parade ?

[logi_cal869]

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=8047

[logi_cal869]

Almost lost my coffee on the puter screen. LOL.

[NorthMountain]

What is that androgynous thing holding the red plastic dildo?

[logi_cal869]

It’s her color. /s
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=8047

[NorthMountain]

Jin noted that there “are lots of arguments to be made between the connections of guns and phalluses, right? It’s a power thing, it’s a sexuality thing, it’s a control thing, it’s a masculinity thing.”

"Jin" is a very disturbed person.

[Demanwideplan]

The Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, not the right of the state to restrict individuals from keeping and bearing arms.So non violent felons can legally carry!! Woo hop, my son can go hunting with me.

[Ancesthntr]

“Why are they all carrying little statues of Brennan?”

---

LOL!

I was actually thinking that they looked more like Obama or (Gestapo) Mueller...kind of difficult to see in the poor light. :>)

[FreedomPoster]

OK, I about spit out my chicken salad on that! LOL!

[Hot Tabasco]

Is that photo from a Dildos for Dummies rally?

[MeganC]

“Jennifer Lynn Glass, Lisa Moore and Mia Carter argued that their First Amendment right to academic freedom has been violated because free speech is chilled in classrooms out of concern that someone might be carrying a concealed handgun.”

I’m curious: what is it these three women are usually saying in class that’s so bad that they expect to get shot?

[Billthedrill]

A few years ago when I was working at the University of Idaho we had this issue - liberal town in a gun-friendly state, utter hysteria from the institutionalized gowns who apparently didn’t realize that as soon as they stepped off campus half of the population around them was carrying. The promised bloodbath is yet to occur but somewhere in the faculty they’re hoping for one as hard as they can.