Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Reversal of Dearth v. Holder Opens the Door to More Challenges of Federal Gun Laws

  1. #1
    State Researcher Bill Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nortonville, KY, USA
    Posts
    4,291

    Reversal of Dearth v. Holder Opens the Door to More Challenges of Federal Gun Laws

    A successful outcome from this decision would begin the start of dismantling the entire federal framework prohibiting the purchase of firearms outside of one’s state of residence.

    http://www.ammoland.com/2011/04/18/r...%28ammoland%29

    Here is the opinion of the court given by Circuit Judge Ginsburg.
    GINSBURG, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs Stephen Dearth and the Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. (SAF), seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, claim that portions of 18 U.S.C. § 922 and related regulations are unconstitutional because they prevent Dearth from purchasing a firearm. The district court dismissed the suit for lack of standing. Because we conclude Dearth does have standing, we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings.

  2. #2
    Regular Member DevinWKuska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Spanaway
    Posts
    300
    Maybe we can send this to canada and buy all those guns they are destroying?
    "So there I was between a rock and a hard place, when it hit me... What am I doing on this side of the rock?"

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Very interesting!

    Saving the link to read later.

  4. #4
    Regular Member 1911er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Port Orchard Wa. /Granite Oklahoma
    Posts
    836
    Quote Originally Posted by M1Gunr View Post
    A successful outcome from this decision would begin the start of dismantling the entire federal framework prohibiting the purchase of firearms outside of one’s state of residence.

    http://www.ammoland.com/2011/04/18/r...%28ammoland%29

    Here is the opinion of the court given by Circuit Judge Ginsburg.
    GINSBURG, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs Stephen Dearth and the Second Amendment Foundation, Inc. (SAF), seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, claim that portions of 18 U.S.C. § 922 and related regulations are unconstitutional because they prevent Dearth from purchasing a firearm. The district court dismissed the suit for lack of standing. Because we conclude Dearth does have standing, we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings.
    Thanks for posting this article great info .
    I truly Love my Country, But the government scares the he!! out of me.

    DEMAND IT
    Congress SHALL NOT receive A salary greater than any service member and will be given EQUIVELANT insurance as any service member

    I came into this world kicking and screaming covered in someone else's blood. And if necessary to protect the Constitution of The United States of AMERICA. I will go out the same way

    All hail the Domain of Neptunus Rex

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315
    Keep in mind that the actual case still has to be ruled on. All that was decided is that he has a right to go to court. If a court found that he lacked standing when he clearly did (ie they didn't want to hear the case because they don't want to overturn the law) that same court will probably bend over backwards to find against him during the actual case. This will be a long row to hoe as it will undoubtedly have to go all the way to the SCOTUS. Plan on at least three more years.

    Would be a nice law to overturn, however, since it is stupid on the face of it. I wish Congress would just abolish it and save everybody the time and hassle.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •