Kavanaugh, who has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit since 2006, dissented from a 2011 decision in which a three-judge panel upheld the District of Columbia's ban on so-called assault weapons and its requirement that all guns be registered. Kavanaugh disagreed with the majority's use of "intermediate scrutiny," saying an analysis "based on text, history, and tradition" is more consistent with the Supreme Court's Second Amendment precedents.
The D.C. "assault weapon" ban covers a list of specific models as well as guns that meet certain criteria. A semi-automatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine is illegal, for instance, if it has any of six prohibited features, including an adjustable stock, a pistol grip, or a flash suppressor. "The list appears to be haphazard," Kavanaugh noted. "It bans certain semi-automatic rifles but not others with no particular explanation or rationale for why some made the list and some did not." In any case, he concluded, the law is inconsistent with the landmark 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller.
If he ruthlessly defends the 2nd amendment, for 25 more years, Ill be pleased
The D.C. "assault weapon" ban covers a list of specific models as well as guns that meet certain criteria. A semi-automatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine is illegal, for instance, if it has any of six prohibited features, including an adjustable stock, a pistol grip, or a flash suppressor. "The list appears to be haphazard," Kavanaugh noted. "It bans certain semi-automatic rifles but not others with no particular explanation or rationale for why some made the list and some did not." In any case, he concluded, the law is inconsistent with the landmark 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller.
If he ruthlessly defends the 2nd amendment, for 25 more years, Ill be pleased
That doesn't "Read" like a 2nd Amendment defense to me. To ME,it reads like a bitch they didn't dot their "i's" and cross their "t's".
He was NOT complaining about their desire to limit American Constitutional Freedoms,he was bitching because it was a poorly-done job.
That doesn't "Read" like a 2nd Amendment defense to me. To ME,it reads like a bitch they didn't dot their "i's" and cross their "t's".
He was NOT complaining about their desire to limit American Constitutional Freedoms,he was bitching because it was a poorly-done job.
Kavanaugh DISSENT at 2-3, Heller II, 670 F.3d 1244 (DC Cir 10-7036, 2011)
In my judgment, both D.C.s ban on semi-automatic rifles and its gun registration requirement are unconstitutional under Heller.
In Heller, the Supreme Court held that handguns the vast majority of which today are semi-automatic are constitutionally protected because they have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens. There is no meaningful or persuasive constitutional distinction between semi-automatic handguns and semi-automatic rifles. Semi-automatic rifles, like semi-automatic handguns, have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens for self-defense in the home, hunting, and other lawful uses. Moreover, semi-automatic handguns are used in connection with violent crimes far more than semi-automatic rifles are. It follows from Hellers protection of semi-automatic handguns that semi-automatic rifles are also constitutionally protected and that D.C.s ban on them is unconstitutional. (By contrast, fully automatic weapons, also known as machine guns, have traditionally been banned and may continue to be banned after Heller.)
D.C.s registration requirement, which is significantly more stringent than any other federal or state gun law in the United States, is likewise unconstitutional. Heller and later McDonald said that regulations on the sale, possession, or use of guns are permissible if they are within the class of traditional, longstanding gun regulations in the United States. Registration of all lawfully possessed guns as distinct from licensing of gun owners or mandatory record-keeping by gun sellers has not traditionally been required in the United States and even today remains highly unusual. Under Hellers history- and tradition-based test, D.C.s registration requirement is therefore unconstitutional.