Coalition of Leftist Attorney Generals Argue for the Power of States to Ban Common Arms

AmmoLand ^ | October 13, 2023 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

A coalition of leftist Attorney Generals for sixteen states and the District of Columbia has filed an amicus brief to the Ninth Circuit appeal by the State of Hawaii, claiming state power to ban common arms is essential.  On August 7, 2023, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit reached the unsurprising conclusion that knives, particularly the type of pocket knife called a “butterfly knife” or “balisong,” were bearable arms. Therefore, they were protected by the Second Amendment of the Constitution, and the State of Hawaii did not have the legal authority to ban them.

On September 20, 2023, the State of Hawaii appealed to Teter v Lopez, claiming the three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit mistakenly applied the law, asking for a new panel or a hearing en banc. The Ninth Circuit has historically been hostile to the Second Amendment and has reversed the decision of three-judge panels that uphold Second Amendment rights.

On September 22, the plaintiffs, Teter and Grell, were ordered to file a response to the appeal within 21 days.

On October 2, 2023, the coalition of 14 state Attorney Generals and the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief in support of the appeal. The arguments of the State of Hawaii, the 14 leftist attorney generals, and the District of Columbia are remarkably similar. In sum, they are this:

1. The Heller and Bruen decisions did not clarify that all bearable arms are preemptively covered by the Second Amendment (they carefully do not mention the unanimous Caetano decision, which says the opposite.)
2. The Heller and Bruen decisions only protect arms shown to be in common use for self-defense.

[zeugma]

It is not the right of the states to ban any guns.

States don't have 'rights'. They have 'powers', and they only have those if we let them.

[Dead Corpse]

The Second covers a LOT more than just guns.

Rocks and pointy sticks up to the most advanced tech weaponry... ALL covered by the 2A.

[Pajamajan]

"The left is working hard to define the Second Amendment into non-existence."

Of course they are.

The thieving, lying, criminal, government doesn't want the citizens to be armed.

[piytar]

CALIFORNIA, ARIZONA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, ILLINOIS, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, NEW JERSEY, NEW YORK, OREGON, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, WASHINGTON, AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

(All caps because I copied from a brief in the case.)

[Dead Corpse]

"The corollary, from the first position, is, that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people.

Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature.

But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both."

William Rawle - A View of the US Constitution 1829

[Organic Panic]

“IF you think government is overbearing now just wait until you are disarmed.”

Remember to remind the “Back the Blue” crowd that it will be “The Blue” who comes to crack their skulls down when you don’t comply with their government employers.

[Dead Corpse]

Agreed... to a point. There were some things even the States were not to be allowed to infringe upon...

Read the Pre-amble to the Bill of Rights and you’ll understand.

[Bshaw]

And if they wish to implement such a ban, the process is very straight forward; amend the U.S. Constitution.

[FlingWingFlyer]

Why can’t we toss those morons in Hawaii and their judges the hell out of the Union? They are a real pain in the ass.

[marktwain]

Why can’t we toss those morons in Hawaii and their judges the hell out of the Union?

Easy. "We" don't have the political power to do so. If we did, "we" would not toss them out of the Union, we would insist they have a "republican" form of government and enforce the Bill of Rights in their territory.

This lawsuit is an attempt to force them to honor the contract which is the Constitution.