SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

McDonald v. City of Chicago

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

No. 08–1521. Argued March 2, 2010—Decided June 28, 2010

Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. ___, this Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense and struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. Chicago (hereinafter City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens. After Heller, petitioners filed this federal suit against the City, which was consolidated with two related actions, alleging that the City’s handgun ban has left them vulnerable to criminals. They sought a declaration that the ban and several related City ordinances violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Rejecting petitioners’ argument that the ordinances are unconstitutional, the court noted that the Seventh Circuit previously had upheld the constitutionality of a handgun ban, that Heller had explicitly refrained from opining on whether the Second Amendment applied to the States, and that the court had a duty to follow established Circuit precedent. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, relying on three 19th-century cases—United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, and Miller v. Texas, 153 U. S. 535— which were decided in the wake of this Court’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause in the Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36.

Held: The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded.

567 F. 3d 856, reversed and remanded.   To read more Click here

District of Columbia v. Heller
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms

On June 26, 2008, The United States Supreme Court issued its landmark opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller confirming that the Second Amendment is an individual right for Americans to keep and bear arms. Click here to read  the Supreme Court’s complete opinion in District of Columbia v Heller.

Nordyke v. King

On April 20, 2009, the Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeal issued its opinion in Nordyke v King.  This challenged an effective ban on gun shows at the Alameda County Fairgrounds by the County of Alameda. While the case was originally about banning gun shows on county property, this is the first United States Court of Appeal decision ruling that the United States Supreme Court ruling in District of Columbia v Heller  is “incorporated” or, in plain language, is enforceable against a State not just against the District of Columbia, which is a federal enclave.  Click here to read the 9^th Circuit’s complete opinion in Nordyke v King.

California Legal AR15 Rifles

In 2001, the California Supreme Court ruled, in Harrott v County of Kings, that a trial court may not find a semiautomatic firearm a series assault weapon under Penal Code Section 12276, subdivision (e), unless the firearm has first been included in the list of series assault weapons promulgated by the California Attorney General pursuant to section 12276.5, subdivision (h).  The authority of the California Attorney General to add firearms to this list as series assault weapons expired on January 1, 2007.  As a result, California law does not classify as an assault weapon an AR15 style rifle built on a lower receiver which is not on this list and which does not have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine because it is equipped with a “bullet button” magazine release requiring the use of a bullet or ammunition cartridge to detach the magazine which is a considered a tool.  Why?

See Title 11 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 5469(a) below:

 California Code of Regulations

TITLE 11. LAW  
DIVISION 5. FIREARMS REGULATIONS  
CHAPTER 39. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REGULATIONS FOR ASSAULT WEAPONS AND LARGE CAPACITY MAGAZINES  
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED TO IDENTIFY ASSAULT WEAPONS

 11 CCR 5469 (2009)

§ 5469.  Definitions

    The following definitions apply to terms used in the identification of assault weapons pursuant to Penal Code section 12276.1:

(a) "detachable magazine" means any ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with neither disassembly of the firearm action nor use of a tool being required. A bullet or ammunition cartridge is considered a tool. Ammunition feeding device includes any belted or linked ammunition, but does not include clips, en bloc clips, or stripper clips that load cartridges into the magazine.

(b) "flash suppressor" means any device designed, intended, or that functions to perceptibly reduce or redirect muzzle flash from the shooter's field of vision.

(c) "forward pistol grip" means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp forward of the trigger.

(d) "pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon" means a grip that allows for a pistol style grasp in which the web of the trigger hand (between the thumb and index finger) can be placed below the top of the exposed portion of the trigger while firing.

(e) "thumbhole stock" means a stock with a hole that allows the thumb of the trigger hand to penetrate into or through the stock while firing.