This ruling from the 9th Circuit Court establishes for the first time incorporation for the 2nd Amendment under a higher level of scrutiny honored by the 14th Amendment. That's big news.
It also destroys the arguments being made against Incorporation by the opposition in the Chicago Gun Ban case.
Most importantly, by affirming the lower court's decision against the Nordykes in favor of Alameda County, the option to press the issue to the highest court rests with the Nordykes. Why should they? The ruling laid out that it wasn't the gun show that was prohibited, just the danger of carrying of arms on public property in the 'sensitive area' was considered. The Nordykes ought to be able to meet the county's concern reasonably by establishing safety considerations regarding the guns being sold on-site at public places in Alameda County, or simply by moving their gun show to private property.
Just like the Heller case, the Nordyke case was another suit where the anti-gunners risked everything (even when many of their kind told them not to take this chance) and lost everything even after 'winning' the initial round. Hoisted by their own petard. If you think Washington DC would do it differently than they did had they known the outcome, well, then that goes double for Alameda County.
Thanks to Nordyke, no longer can California sheriffs discriminate who they can issue CCW permits to, or not at all. Today's decision took that away from them. Same also with semi-automatic rifles being prohibited as not having any use for private citizens. That got blown away too.
To a Californian gun owner, this means a huge amount. For those of us who live in freer states under the 9th Circuit Court, it means slightly less since we don't really have maniac gun grabbing politicians like they do. At least I don't think it does, but I'd be interested to see if 'Stewart vs. US' is revisited. In any case, if you live in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, you're presently a little freer than the rest of the nation. I hope that the 5th Circuit Court in Texas shortly follows suit, because I believe that they're itching to do so.
The Nordyke case won't overturn many onerous gun laws immediately, but you can at least consider both Nordyke and Heller to be 100 yard touchdowns after the anti-gunners ball was picked off in an interception.
Certainly not time to be complacemnt, or count chickend before they hatch, or...
My suggestion to everyone - join the NRA now if you are not already a memeber.
I just read the decision. My first reaction is that it has some good verbiage, but that the purported selective incorporation under due process was no more than dicta; not necessary for the decision and having no value as precedent.
IOW, the 9th could have affirmed the ordinance w/o giving us a history lesson and straying into the incorporation issue.
But, don’t get me wrong. I favor incorporation of the 2nd on DP grounds. And, again, the rhetoric in the opinion was encouraging.
Outstanding post!
The “5th Circuit Court in Texas” is actually in New Orleans, I believe.
I agree completely. Equal protection under the law...that was the ruling and it was forced upon every state, county and municipality in the 9th Circuit.
There is simply NO WAY a County Sheriff can withstand the scrutiny of a CIVIL RIGHT when he issues to some, but not others. I don't care what his criteria is.
I'm thinking I'll apply right here in Sacramento county...and sue when denied.
Semi-automatics are not banned. There's a list of "Assault Weapons" that are banned.
However, it appears that if such a weapon is legal in Texas, the State of California is denying a BASIC CIVIL RIGHT to CA citizens by banning these weapons.
Subscribe