Indiana Court First to Rule Gun Industry Legal Shield Law Unconstitutional

US Newswire Press Release / The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence ^ | 10/26/06 | n/a

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

A state judge declaring a federal law unconstitutional? When the law in question involves interstate commerce and therefore is actually under the proper jurisdiction of the feds? Let alone 2nd Amendment arguments?

What you said. Seems like there ought to be a law left over from the Civil War that would tell a state judge to have no part of that!

[Right Cal Gal]

Smooches baby - that made my day.

[dirtboy]

He's definitely taken creative usurpation to a new level, so he'd be a leader on that court.

[3niner]

A state judge rules that a federal law is unconstitutional. Isn't that unconstitutional?

[3niner]

Making guns, of course. ;-)

[dirtboy]

I dunno, does two unconstitutionals make a constitutional?

[3niner]

RBG would vote to remand because SCOTUS isn't gonna let some podunk state judge trample on their turf.

That's right, it's a safe bet that the Supremes are 9-0 on this one.

[School of Rational Thought]

"The court ruled that "laws that serve as a deprivation of existing rights are particularly unsuited to a democracy such as ours." "

That is why, of course, the Brady group wants to deprive you of your civil rights.

[Repeal The 17th]

"... doesn't sound like a good idea considering the actions of the gun industry. Can someone explain it to me?..."
-
Or, better still,
can you explain what you mean by the phrase "the actions of the gun industry" to me?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

The law is an effort to make guns too expensive to manufacture. Plain and simple.

Actually, the law is an effort to prevent Sarah Brady and the courts from making guns too expensive to manufacture. However, these judges, knowing that no one willl lift a finger to remove them, keep overriding it.

[dirtboy]

My bad, it should have read "The lawSUIT is an effort to make guns too expensive to manufacture. Plain and simple."

[Trailerpark Badass]

I was under the impression that most "crime guns" were stolen.

Well, they were bought from a dealer at one point. Also, the casual use of the word "dealer" makes me wonder if the the actual federal data refers to distributors, of which there are only a handful of very large ones.

[CaptRon]

I don't know that any judge is barred from deciding if a law is unconstituional, but he sure made an appeal easier since there is now a federal question involved.

[dirtboy]

I don't know that any judge is barred from deciding if a law is unconstituional

A state judge can declare a state law to be unconstitutional. He has no jurisdiction over a federal law.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The only way Ginsburg would not support this asinine ruling is if she has been replaced by an alien lizard in disguise.

[CaptRon]

State judges make these decisions all the time; excluding evidence on 4th Amendment grounds, due process and equal protection issues. In fact, they are pretty much obligated to since they are bound to abide by the Constitution by the supremacy clause.

[BlackElk]

I always thought that it was the Ninth CIRCUS Court of Appeals.

[bruoz]

"I'm all for the 2nd ammendment, but this Federal Law doesn't sound like a good idea considering the actions of the gun industry. Can someone explain it to me?"

Please explain what "actions" you're talking about.

[Redcloak]

Um... Since when do State judges get to rule on Federal laws?

[dirtboy]

State judges make these decisions all the time; excluding evidence on 4th Amendment grounds, due process and equal protection issues.

They do not declare federal laws to be unconstitutional. They apply federal law to the cases before them.