Welcome to Talking Justice Sign in | Join | Help
in
Justice Talking About All Blogs Today's Blog Forums
The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies is a group of conservatives and libertarians founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of governmental powers is central to our Constitution, and that it is emphatically the province and duty of the judiciary to say what the law is, not what it should be. The Society seeks both to promote an awareness of these principles among lawyers, judges, and law professors. and to further their application by reordering priorities within the legal system to place a premium on individual liberty, traditional values, and the rule of law.

About Bob Levy
Robert A. Levy is senior fellow in constitutional studies and a board member at the Cato Institute. Bob also sits on boards of the Institute for Justice and the Federalist Society. He received his PhD from American University in 1966, and his JD in 1994 from George Mason University, where he was chief articles editor of the law review. The next two years he clerked on the federal courts in Washington, D.C. For many years, Bob was an adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University. His writing has appeared in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and numerous other publications. He has also appeared on many national radio and TV programs. Bob’s third book, on the Supreme Court, will be published this spring.

D.C. Gun Ban in the Cross-Hairs

In a blockbuster opinion on , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down , The court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms.  This fall, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether it wants to review the appellate court’s decision.  If the Supreme Court takes the case, a final opinion will likely be issued by June 30, 2008.

 

I serve as co-counsel for the plaintiffs in Parker v. District of Columbia, the first and only federal appellate decision to overturn a gun control law on Second Amendment grounds.  At issue in the case are three D.C. laws that prohibit law-abiding citizens from possessing functional firearms in their homes for self-defense.  First, the city has banned registration of handguns since 1976.  Second, even if one were to possess a pre-1976 handgun, it cannot be moved from room to room without a special permit.  And permits are not available.  Third, D.C. requires that all firearms be unloaded and either disassembled or bound by a trigger lock at all times while kept at home.

 

No state in the country imposes an outright ban on functional guns the way ,   Yet the Second Amendment means what it says:  The “right of the people to keep and bear arms, s l not be infringed .”  Of course, that right – like every other constitutional right including free speech and religious liberty – is subject to reasonable regulation.  But a total ban is not a “reasonable regulation.”

 

Despite the hysterical claims of many anti-gun groups, a Supreme Court ruling that affirms the appellate court will not result in the wholesale elimination of gun laws from coast to coast.  Laws that forbid felons, children, or lunatics from possessing guns will not be affected.  But laws whose primary purpose is to discourage gun ownership and make it more difficult -- unless they are shown, unambiguously, to produce countervailing social benefits -- should be invalidated.  The courts must look at gun control the way they look at laws interfering with other constitutionally protected rights -- with one eye on legitimate public safety concerns and one eye on the Constitution.


Published Wednesday, August 29, 2007 11:58 PM by Bob Levy

© The Federalist Society. All rights reserved.

Comments

Please note that we encourage a vigorous debate on the issues from all points along the political spectrum on the Talking Justice blogs and discussion forums. However, we ask that you stay to the topic of the particular blog or forum post and that the debate remain civil. Profanity, spam and personal attacks on the program host or guests, contributors or other Talking Justice users will not be tolerated and are subject to deletion without notice. Moreover, any comment which is patently offensive, threatening or potentially libelous will be removed without notice. Persons who repeatedly attempt to post material that violates the site policies may, at the discretion of Justice Talking, be blocked from participating in the future.

Justice Talking, not the individual bloggers on this site, will make all decisions about whether comments to the blogs contained here should be edited or removed and whether individuals who violate our policies will be allowed to continue to post. Also, please note that, like all of the content on the Justice Talking radio show, the views expressed on these blogs and discussion boards belong solely to the person or organization posting them and do not reflect the views or opinions of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, the University of Pennsylvania, or NPR.



No Comments
Anonymous comments are disabled. Click "Join" at top-right to add comments.

Closed to Comments

Note: Justice Talking ceased production on June 30 of 2008. The Talking Justice blogs and forums are provided as a read-only resource for historical interest only. Commenting on blog posts has been suspended.

All opinions expressed are those of the author. The Annenberg Public Policy Center makes no claim as the the accuracy of claims or continued availability of any third party web links found on this site.

This Blog

Select Blog by Day

Syndication

Groups

©2008 Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania unless otherwise noted.