Palmer v. DC

3 posts
Civil Rights

DC Has a Carry Law, and It’s Terrible

In response to their recent court loss in Palmer v. DC, the District of Columbia has drafted a law [pdf] allowing civilians to carry firearms. The city council is doing their best to flaunt the court order without veering into direct contempt, much as they did following the Heller decision.

Essentially, one might be able to get a permit to carry in the District, but the bill is structured in such a way as to make it virtually useless. Here are the major provisions:

Applicants must demonstrate “a good reason to fear injury” and “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from the general community.” Applicants must provide documented evidence of their plight. Said evidence may not be enough to sway the issuing authorities, who can deny the existence of a special need on a whim.

Applicants have to complete a course certified by the Chief of Police that includes at least 16 hours of training.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Can We Now Carry in DC?

Miller has been involved with this for quite some time. She has more on the issue here. Lanier has also instructed police to allow any qualified nonresident to carry in the District.

(Edit: here’s Lanier’s actual order [pdf])

Here’s the first catch: nonresidents are free to carry, but DC residents can only carry a gun that’s registered there.  The registry in DC has been closed since 1976. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Heller was supposed to change that, but it’s still virtually impossible to get a handgun in the District. Gun shops are prohibited by zoning laws, so residents can’t buy a handgun directly. There is only one FFL willing to transfer handguns in from out of state.

Continued...

Civil Rights

Palmer v. D.C.

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that Washington D.C. could not ban the ownership of handguns. The city responded by passing the hysterically-named Firearms Registration Emergency Amendment Act [pdf]. It created as many hurdles as legally feasible for would-be gun owners. and it prohibited the carry of firearms outside the home.

Alan Gura brought this case in response to the ban on carry. The District Court did its best to ignore it for two years. In 2011 Chief Justice Roberts intervened and ordered Judge Scullin to hear it. Then it seemed to disappear again.

As such, it goes without saying that today’s opinion [pdf] was unexpected. Cue the highlight reel:

In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny.

Continued...