Chicago sidearm ban upheld

Discussion in 'The Constitutional & RKBA Forum' started by Marlin T, Jun 3, 2009.

  1. Marlin T

    Marlin T Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,906
    Location:
    New Mexico
    Chicago Law Banning Handguns in City Upheld by Court (Update3)

    By Andrew M. Harris
    June 2 (Bloomberg) -- A Chicago ordinance banning handguns and automatic weapons within city limits was upheld by a U.S. Court of Appeals panel, which rejected a challenge by the National Rifle Association.
    The unanimous three-judge panel ruled today that a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year, which recognized an individual right to bear arms under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment, didn’t apply to states and municipalities.
    “The Supreme Court has rebuffed requests to apply the second amendment to the states,” U.S. Circuit Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote, upholding lower court decisions last year to throw out suits against Chicago and its suburb of Oak Park, Illinois.
    The Fairfax, Virginia-based NRA sued the municipalities in June 2008, one day after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller struck down a hand-gun ban in the U.S. capital district encompassing Washington.
    “We clearly disagree with the court’s conclusion,” NRA attorney William N. Howard, a partner in Chicago’s Freeborn & Peters LLP, said in a telephone interview. “The next step will be an appeal to the Supreme Court.”
    “We recognize that this may not be the end of this litigation,” Jenny Hoyle, a spokeswoman for the city of Chicago’s law department said, acknowledging the likelihood the NRA would seek further review. “We’re certainly prepared for that if this happens. We’re prepared to aggressively defend our ordinance.”
    Second Amendment
    Adopted in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment reads in its entirety: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
    In Heller, the high court struck down Washington’s 32-year- old gun law, which barred most residents of the city from owning handguns and required that all legal firearms be kept unloaded and either disassembled or under trigger lock. Six residents had challenged the law, saying they wanted firearms available in their homes for self-defense.
    “Heller dealt with a law enacted under the authority of the national government,” Easterbrook wrote, “while Chicago and Oak Park are subordinate bodies of a state.”
    Chicago’s law took effect in 1982, Hoyle said. While it allows ownership of long guns such as rifles, they must be registered annually with the city’s police department. Concealed weapons, semi-automatic and automatic weapons are not permitted.
    Some exemptions apply to members of the military and law enforcement agencies.
    Following Precedent
    Chicago U.S. District Judge Milton Shadur on Dec. 4 rejected the NRA’s request that he apply the Heller ruling to the Chicago and Oak Park laws, stating he was bound to follow a 1982 appeals court ruling upholding a ban by the Illinois village of Morton Grove.
    That decision came from the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago, the same body that issued today’s opinion. The 15 judges of the Seventh Circuit hear appeals from the federal courts of Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin.
    Easterbrook, joined by Circuit Court Judges Richard Posner and William Bauer, said they, too, were bound to follow the precedent of a higher court, the U.S. Supreme Court, in its ruling on the Second Amendment not applying to states.
    An appellate court departure from high court precedent “undermines the uniformity of national law,” Easterbrook wrote.
    The judges rendered their ruling one week after hearing arguments.
    Applicable Law
    A San Francisco-based federal appeals court, with jurisdiction over cases from California, Oregon, Washington and six other Western U.S. states, in April ruled the Second Amendment can be read as applicable to states and counties.
    Still, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Nordyke v. King allowed to stand an Alameda County, California regulation that outlaws gun possession on county property.
    Howard, the NRA’s lawyer, cited the Nordyke ruling as one of the reasons for his client’s challenge to the Chicago court outcome.
    “This thing is headed for the Supreme Court,” University of Chicago Constitutional Law Professor Richard Epstein said in a phone interview.
    “This is a question where you cannot run a split administration and there’s no way the circuits can resolve this amongst themselves,” he said.
    The 7th Circuit case is National Rifle Association of America v. City of Chicago, 08-4241, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (Chicago). The 9th Circuit case is Nordyke v. King, 07-15763, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (San Francisco).
    To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew M. Harris at the federal court in Chicago at aharris16@bloomberg.net.
    Last Updated: June 2, 2009 17:16 EDT
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=awIn1M4tWxi8&refer=worldwide
  2. dge479

    dge479 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    618
    Location:
    Haskell NJ
    I am dissapointed, but I cant say this is any surprise at all.
  3. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    And people wonder why Chicago has such a high crime rate:rolleyes: Oh wait, according to liberal logic, Chicago would have a low crime rate because they have such tight gun laws. That's the same logic that says Washington DC's murder rate of 69 per 100,000 was low because of the gun ban, but a city that allows gun ownership and has a murder rate of 8 per 100,000 is too high:rolleyes::rolleyes:
  4. OBrien

    OBrien New Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2009
    Messages:
    554
    Location:
    Bangor Maine
    Does this mean the rest of the bill of rights does not apply to states and municipalities? Can New York decide tomorrow that they don't need search warrants or Miami can jail you for being a certain religion? If the second amendment does not apply to states and municipalities do any of the others?
  5. Hardballer

    Hardballer New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    471
    Location:
    Smack dab in da middle
    Now that is a 640,000 (corrected for inflation) question. This could be interesting.
  6. alhefner

    alhefner New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    Messages:
    205
    Location:
    Reno, NV
    If the Supreme court does decide that the Second Amendment does NOT apply to states and municipalities, then YES none of the bill of rights apply to any state or municipality and basic civil rights are up for abuse at every level other than the federal level.

    BTW, that stance is the one that Sotomayor has taken on the second amendment.

    Had to write a new article for my own site because of this. The U.S. Court of Appeals has effectively stated that the Bill of Rights ONLY applies to federal law.
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2009
  7. 45nut

    45nut Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,470
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Holy Crap, you mean those idgits on the US Court of Appeals don't believe in individual rights, like Karl Marx, Woodrow Wilson, Hitler, Stalin, FDR & Mussolini??
  8. mrkirker

    mrkirker New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    3,067
    Yeah, it would seem that the Bill of Rights is really a piece of "Cafeteria Legislation", from which each state or municipality can ‘select’ which aspects to apply to their particular situation.
    How Konvenient!
  9. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,719
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio
    If the second amendment does not apply to states and municipalities then none of the other bill of rights do. If this rulling is upheld it is an act of war against the people of the United States. The bill of rights has nothing to do with state and local government other than to limit their powers. It is a guarantee of rights of ALL citizens of the United States.

    This is an example of the idiocy of those in positions of power. As time goes on I am more and more convinced that today our institutions of higher learning are teaching a separate reality where our rules of logic don't apply.

    Of course the second amendment applies to people living within states and municipalities. Everyone lives in one state or another. Who would the second amendment be for then if not those citizens residing in states or municipalities?

    This stupidity and ignorance infuriates me.
  10. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    The closet-commies are setting up a legla framework so they can illegally take away our rights, but do it under a thin cloak of legality. Typical liberal logic:rolleyes:
  11. oscarmayer

    oscarmayer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,382
    chicago has the best judges money can buy. i'm sure mr piece of crap daley saw to it this was crushed in court
  12. carver

    carver Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Messages:
    17,853
    Location:
    DAV, Deep in the Pineywoods of East Texas, just we
    The opening line of the Constitution: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    I suppose that Chicago does not consider itself part of the Union?
  13. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    Well, if they don't, I say they can go. In fact, I wish they would go. Along with the liberal whackamoles that run New York, California, and Washington DC. Send them all someplace else. Let the few conservatives in those places have a chance at runnign things there.
  14. swiftman

    swiftman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    224
    Location:
    East Central Ill
    Chicago is Obama's model for the rest of the United States.
  15. tireman7.62x54r

    tireman7.62x54r Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Messages:
    155
    Location:
    Illinois
    Up coming gun rally in Daley's Kingdom.

    The Illinois State Rifle Association and IllinoisCarry.com are holding a Second Amendment Freedom Rally 2009 on June 26th. 11am to 1pm at the James R. Thompson Center, 100 W. Randolph St., Chicago, IL

    The event will probably be ignored by the Chicago media, just like they ignored the March 11 2009 rally at the state capital in Springfield. Where 5000 gun owners marched to the capital to lobby their legislators. The rally wasn't reported by the Chicago media.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum City of Chicago ordered to pay NRA's legal fees Jul 9, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Chicago Chief is nuts. Apr 14, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Chicago gun sale ban unconstitutional Jan 6, 2014
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Chicago Politics and the Brady Bunch are going after my Family Apr 30, 2013
The Constitutional & RKBA Forum Chicago's Police Chief. Feb 26, 2013

Share This Page