• 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.

Virginia Supreme Court Upholds GMU's Unlawful Gun Ban

Virginiaplanter

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2007
Messages
402
Location
, ,
33. DiGiacinto v. The Rector and Visitors of George Mason University, __ Va. __, __ S.E.2d __ (2011) January 13, 2011. A Dark and Sad Day in Virginia's History. The Regulation is Upheld as Constitutional and Valid by Subverting the Virginia Constitution.

"We hold that GMU is a sensitive place and that 8 VAC § 35-60-20 is constitutional and does not violate Article I, § 13 of the Constitution of Virginia or the Second Amendment of the federal Constitution...

GMU claims that Article I, § 14 is not a self-executing provision of the Constitution of Virginia. We disagree...Despite our conclusion that Article I, § 14 is self-executing, in order for DiGiacinto to prove a violation of that constitutional provision, he must establish that GMU, in promulgating 8 VAC § 35-60-20, functioned as a separate or independent government. The history of Article I, § 14 indicates that its origin related to the boundary problems that the Commonwealth faced during its inception: "Virginians were concerned that some of the land companies might attempt to create a new state within the boundaries of Virginia in order to enhance their chances of successfully defending claims to vast amounts of unsettled and sparsely settled land." 1 A.E. Dick Howard, Commentaries on the Constitution of Virginia 279 (1974). In the instant case, the argument that GMU, in promulgating 8 VAC § 35-60-20, was attempting to function as a separate government is without merit. GMU had statutory authority under Code § 23-91.29 to make regulations concerning the university. Therefore, GMU did not violate Article I, § 14.

Lastly, DiGiacinto argues that the General Assembly cannot acquiesce or delegate its powers away to GMU. Code § 23-91.24 makes clear that GMU is "subject at all times to the control of the General Assembly." The General Assembly did not improperly give or delegate its powers to GMU. Therefore, we hold that this argument likewise lacks merit.

Accordingly, for the reasons stated, we will affirm the circuit court's judgment."

Note to this decision by Virginia1774.org. The Commentaries by A.E. Dick Howard used by the Court states that Article I, § 13 is not an individual right. The Virginia Supreme Court ruled on the matter of unlawful authority and Va. Const. Art. I, § 14 in 1793 with Justice Roane stating the following: To come now more immediately to the question before the court; can those who are appointed judges in chancery, by an act of assembly, without ballot, and without commission during good behavior, constitutionally exercise that office? The fourteenth article of the Virginia Constitution recites 'that the people have a right to uniform government; and therefore, that no government separate from, or independent of, the government of Virginia, ought to be erected or established within the limits thereof.' Here then is a general principle pervading all the courts mentioned in the Constitution from which, without an exception, we ought not to depart. If those may be judges who are not appointed by joint ballot, but by an act of assembly, the senate have in that instance more power than the Constitution intended; for they control the other branch, by their negative upon the law...For these reasons, and others which it would be tedious to enumerate, I am of opinion, that the clause in question, is repugnant to the fundamental principles of the Constitution, in as much as the judges of the general court have not been balloted for and commissioned as judges in chancery, pursuant to the fourteenth article of the Constitution. Kamper v. Hawkins, 3 Va. (1 Va. Cases) 20, 40-42 (1793). The uniform government clause is not exclusive to land purchases as maintained by A.E. Dick Howard and the Virginia Supreme Court. See Transylvania Treasure or Treason? See Also: § 18.2-308(G)(3) The General Assembly authorizes firearms training at colleges which are open to the general public.

34. Thanks to the Amici the National Rifle Association and the Virginia Citizens Defense League and to all the others who supported this lawsuit.
 
Last edited:

t33j

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
King George, VA
Well, now I know that I'll do my time there and leave in June.

Does VCDL's 2011 agenda include preempting state agencies?

Haven't seen anything yet. IMO that and the state/national park/forest things are the 2 biggest things left to deal with in Virginia other than CHPs.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Haven't seen anything yet. IMO that and the state/national park/forest things are the 2 biggest things left to deal with in Virginia other than CHPs.

I'm working on VDOF again TJ. I might have a surprise in a week or so.
 

t33j

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
1,384
Location
King George, VA
I'm working on VDOF again TJ. I might have a surprise in a week or so.

I wrote somewhat at length on the topic on all the political surveys that were sent to me. My guess(hope?) is you'll be a bit more effective than me.
icon14.png
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
I wrote somewhat at length on the topic on all the political surveys that were sent to me. My guess(hope?) is you'll be a bit more effective than me.
icon14.png

I'm more of an irritant than you!:lol:
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
He supported the right to keep and bear arms... before he opposed it.

I'll say the same thing I've always said.

1. He inherited that case.
2. The case was lost before it was filed.

Read the AG's arguments. They aren't the sharpest I've ever read. They coasted on this.
 
Last edited:

Mr. Y

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2006
Messages
485
Location
Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
I'll say the same thing I've always said.

1. He inherited that case.
2. The case was lost before it was filed.

Read the AG's arguments. They aren't the sharpest I've ever read. They coasted on this.

A case he promised not to defend and was just plain wrong.

Ken can't explain away the "liar" label no matter how many people try to deflect that.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Starting to hit the news outlets. This story is AP, so it'll be printed all over.

Is this the first time that a court has found that a college meets the definition of a "sensitive" place?

TFred

Virginia Supreme Court upholds college gun ban rules

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - George Mason University's prohibition against guns in campus buildings and at sports and entertainment events does not violate the state or U.S. constitutions, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled Thursday....
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
A case he promised not to defend and was just plain wrong.

Ken can't explain away the "liar" label no matter how many people try to deflect that.

I don't try to deflect it. We all have a firm opinion about this, and I don't think there's much wiggle room or possibility of changing our minds.

I said last week that I wanted to hear his side of the Time story. Aside from what he told Ed, he's keeping quiet or speaking on the condition of confidentially.

Now he can speak publicly and will shortly.

What that will do is give us a whole new list of things to argue about.:lol:
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Starting to hit the news outlets. This story is AP, so it'll be printed all over.

Is this the first time that a court has found that a college meets the definition of a "sensitive" place?

TFred
Virginia Supreme Court upholds college gun ban rules

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - George Mason University's prohibition against guns in campus buildings and at sports and entertainment events does not violate the state or U.S. constitutions, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled Thursday....

That's been my concern all along TFred. We took a hit on this.
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
Our own legal eagle User indicated ages ago he thought that the argument of this case would lead to some really horrible precedent. Guess we got it.
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
"In the instant case, the argument that GMU, in promulgating 8 VAC § 35-60-20, was attempting to function as a separate government is without merit. GMU had statutory authority under Code § 23-91.29 to make regulations concerning the university. Therefore, GMU did not violate Article I, § 14."

Well we know what we need to do. Get Code § 23-91.29 changed such that the university does not have the authority to promulgate it's own VAC restrictions of student's, staff and visitors ability to protect themselves through the carrying of firearms. In my mind there is very little that goes on in a university setting that would make it significantly different in terms of sensitivity than to any other portion of the Commonwealth.

Of course I would think that if one understands the precedent here, a university could easily move to ban the possession of alchohol in any form because it is a sensitive place. Try that one on for size, kiddos.
 
Last edited:

Mr. Y

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2006
Messages
485
Location
Super Secret Squirrel Bunker, Virginia, USA
Mostly for Peter Nap, but anyone subscribing to the "cuccinelli is still our friend" camp (not lumping you in that camp P/N, nor excluding )

What exactly do you expect him to say that will somehow explain to your satisfaction his defense of GMU after lying about it? what would anyone hope to gain by letting him try to "explain it away"?
 
Top