• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Federal Interstate Handgun Sales Ban Ruled Unconstitutional

NAVYBLUE

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
109
Location
Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
With some good pro 2nd Amendment bills winding through the state legislative grist mill, some of you may have missed this recent decision at the Federal level. The basics is you can now buy a handgun in say Montana without having to be a resident and bring it back to Nevada. Source is:

https://www.firearmspolicy.org/news...ate-handgun-sales-ban-ruled-unconstitutional/

NAVYBLUE


"In another excellent victory for civil rights by attorney Alan Gura, United States District Court Judge Reed O’Connor struck down the federal interstate handgun sales ban earlier today, finding it unconstitutional (both facially and as-applied) under the Second Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

As the Court explained, “[t]o prevail on a facial challenge, Plaintiffs must show that either no set of circumstances exists under which the law would be valid or that the statute lacks any plainly legitimate sweep.” That high bar was met by the Plaintiffs’ legal team. The decision explained that “Defendants [United States Attorney General Eric Holder and BATFE director B. Todd Jones] fail[ed] to provide reasonably current figures to show the federal interstate handgun sale ban is narrowly tailored.”

Even though the Court found that strict scrutiny was the proper standard of review for the type of burden on Constitutionally-protected conduct imposed by the challenged laws (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3), 18 U.S.C. § 922 (b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a)), it also noted that the law failed even the relatively-deferential intermediate scrutiny test.

The United States, the Court held, has been enforcing “a regime that is not substantially related to the Government’s stated goal” [of public safety]. Even under intermediate scrutiny, “there must be an indication that the regulation will alleviate the asserted harm to a material degree.” But “Defendants [] failed to carry their burden to show how the federal interstate handgun transfer ban alleviates, in a material way, the problem of prohibited persons obtaining handguns simply by crossing state lines and depriving states of notice that they have under the amended version of the 1968 Gun Control Act.” Accordingly, the laws were declared unconstitutional and enjoined from enforcement.

The lawsuit, captioned Fredric Russell Mance, Jr. et al. v. Eric H. Holder, Jr. and B. Todd Jones, was backed by Citizens’ Commitee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, one of the Bellevue, WA-based civil rights groups led by Alan Gottlieb. CCRKBA was also a plaintiff in the case, which will likely be appealed by the government to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals."
 

The Big Guy

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
1,966
Location
Waco, TX
This is not big, it's immense. This should have been a top story on even a busy news day. If the court had ruled the other way, you would hear it reported for days.

TBG
 

Ron_O

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
109
Location
Las Vegas
With some good pro 2nd Amendment bills winding through the state legislative grist mill, some of you may have missed this recent decision at the Federal level. The basics is you can now buy a handgun in say Montana without having to be a resident and bring it back to Nevada. Source is:

https://www.firearmspolicy.org/news...ate-handgun-sales-ban-ruled-unconstitutional/

NAVYBLUE


"In another excellent victory for civil rights by attorney Alan Gura, United States District Court Judge Reed O’Connor struck down the federal interstate handgun sales ban earlier today, finding it unconstitutional (both facially and as-applied) under the Second Amendment and the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

As the Court explained, “[t]o prevail on a facial challenge, Plaintiffs must show that either no set of circumstances exists under which the law would be valid or that the statute lacks any plainly legitimate sweep.” That high bar was met by the Plaintiffs’ legal team. The decision explained that “Defendants [United States Attorney General Eric Holder and BATFE director B. Todd Jones] fail[ed] to provide reasonably current figures to show the federal interstate handgun sale ban is narrowly tailored.”

Even though the Court found that strict scrutiny was the proper standard of review for the type of burden on Constitutionally-protected conduct imposed by the challenged laws (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3), 18 U.S.C. § 922 (b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a)), it also noted that the law failed even the relatively-deferential intermediate scrutiny test.

The United States, the Court held, has been enforcing “a regime that is not substantially related to the Government’s stated goal” [of public safety]. Even under intermediate scrutiny, “there must be an indication that the regulation will alleviate the asserted harm to a material degree.” But “Defendants [] failed to carry their burden to show how the federal interstate handgun transfer ban alleviates, in a material way, the problem of prohibited persons obtaining handguns simply by crossing state lines and depriving states of notice that they have under the amended version of the 1968 Gun Control Act.” Accordingly, the laws were declared unconstitutional and enjoined from enforcement.

The lawsuit, captioned Fredric Russell Mance, Jr. et al. v. Eric H. Holder, Jr. and B. Todd Jones, was backed by Citizens’ Commitee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, one of the Bellevue, WA-based civil rights groups led by Alan Gottlieb. CCRKBA was also a plaintiff in the case, which will likely be appealed by the government to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals."

I asked this in another venue, but does anyone know if this takes immediate effect or is it only valid in the 5th District or is there some kind of stay already in place?

I'm wondering if, for example, the next time I'm in sales-tax-free Oregon I can buy something over the counter, or even in Arizona?

Just curious what effect this has had.

These decades-old laws are falling one at a time, it seems someone is finally waking up...
 
Last edited:

DON`T TREAD ON ME

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,231
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
I asked this in another venue, but does anyone know if this takes immediate effect or is it only valid in the 5th District or is there some kind of stay already in place?

I'm wondering if, for example, the next time I'm in sales-tax-free Oregon I can buy something over the counter, or even in Arizona?

Just curious what effect this has had.

These decades-old laws are falling one at a time, it seems someone is finally waking up...

It does take immediate effect. The Order that is... However just like winning a judgement does not make money appear in your account, It may be a rough road, or not. The Defendants are the only ones Enjoined from enforcement directly. One can argue it covers all enforcement as the law was declared unconstitutional, and all enforcers take a oath to uphold the Constitution. I agree but think some states will try to run around it, hopefully not.

In the meantime i agree it should be tested!
 

DON`T TREAD ON ME

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,231
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
It will be interesting to see what happens to California's banned handgun list. If people can drive to Reno / Vegas and legally buy a handgun, and magazine! how can it be unlawful to take your legally purchased handgun home?
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
It will be interesting to see what happens to California's banned handgun list. If people can drive to Reno / Vegas and legally buy a handgun, and magazine! how can it be unlawful to take your legally purchased handgun home?

This does not affect state laws.

For example, it is currently legal for interstate sales of long guns from FFL's, but CA state laws forbid it, and every dealer knows it.
 
Last edited:

DON`T TREAD ON ME

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,231
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
This does not affect state laws.

For example, it is currently legal for interstate sales of long guns from FFL's, but CA state laws forbid it, and every dealer knows it.

Yeah I just read the summery judgement, Funny how DC allows out of state purchase... and CA does not. I also saw a blip in the pleadings regarding 18-20 yr. old firearm sales, but no conclusion... Anyone else see that?
 

gonefishn

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
35
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Awesome! That is great news. Buy a gun in a state with no sales tax and bring it home with you. Does it get any better? :)
 
Top