imported post
Before everyone goes off, "half-cocked," as it were, this appeals hearing will decide only two issues. Now, IANAL, but here's my take on this case and the issues involved:
1. The issue of standing and which of the plaintiffs have it.
2. Whether or not the 2A protects an individual right.
Now, if none of the plaintiffs are granted standing, then the hearing stops dead, right there (affirming the lower court ruling). Question #2 need not be answered.
There is a big problem here, with the "standing" issue. If the Circuit Court denies standing, it would then appear that no one will be able to bring to the Courts a suit for relief, without suffering actual prosecution and conviction. This would in itself negate a portion of our 1A rights of petition.
There is a history within the Federal Courts to restrict standing only to those parties that have suffered actual harm. Such a decision by the D.C. Circuit (arguably the second highest court in the land) would put a nail in the coffin for those that would be prosecuted under questionable laws. One would have to be actually prosecuted, convicted and possibly imprisoned before standing would be allowed to actually sue for relief.
That's the really bad news.
The good news is that if standing is given, then the Court would proceed to answer question #2.
If the Court finds that the 2A recognizes an individual right, then the Court will send it back to the Trial Court for reconsideration, consistant with the Circuit Courts opinion.
The Court will not rule on the scope of the 2A right, regardless. It will however, open the door to future ligation in that regard. That's a good thing.
What is hoped for is that not only that standing will be given, but that the 2A protects an individual right.
Over and above what happens after this, to the plaintiffs, will be the fact that both the 5th Circuit and the D.C. Circuit will have ruled that the 2A protects an individual right. Tha creates a split in the Circuits that will have to be resolved, sooner or later. We will have come closer to forcing the Supreme Court to resolve the split. This will come about if any of the other Circuits decide to shift their thinking and further split the Circuits.
Should the D.C. Circuit rule that the 2A protects something other than an individual right, all bets are off. However, just judging from the accounts of the oral arguments, D.C. is on shakey grounds with the Court as regards the meaning of the 2A.
Yet we still have to get past the issue of standing, regardless. I am hopefully optimistic.