 |
|
You are batting 0 for 2....
Posted on: September 25, 2017 at 09:06:24 CT
Tigrrrr! MU
Posts:
261408
Member For:
23.48 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
42
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_District_of_Columbia
On July 24, 2014, DC's ban on open and concealed carry was struck down as unconstitutional in Palmer v. District of Columbia.[2] Initially Judge Frederick Scullin, Jr. did not issue a stay of his ruling. For a brief period of time, Judge Scullin's ruling effectively legalized permitless open and concealed carry with a valid firearm registration card, and non-residents with valid carry permits issued by their home states could carry openly or concealed in the District. But on July 29, 2014 Scullin issued an order that retroactively stayed the ruling until October 22, 2014.[3][4] In response to the ruling, a Restrictive May-Issue concealed carry licensing law was enacted in September 2014. Under the new law, an applicant must show "good reason," to qualify for a concealed carry permit. However, on May 18, 2015, the "good reason" requirement was ruled as likely unconstitutional and a preliminary injunction was issued against D.C. from enforcing that requirement in Wrenn v. District of Columbia.[5] This effectively required the District to grant licenses on a Shall-Issue basis to qualified applicants who have passed a criminal background check and completed the required firearms safety training. Judge Scullin did not issue a stay of his ruling, but the Appeals Court did so on June 12, 2015, effectively leaving the restrictive 'good reason' requirement in place while litigation continues.[6] It was later ruled that Judge Scullin, a visiting judge from New York, was outside his jurisdiction because he was only appointed to decide the Palmer case, not the follow-up Wrenn case. The Wrenn case was subsequently reassigned and the new judge denied the request for a preliminary injunction.
On May 17, 2016 a separate case (Grace v. District of Columbia) was decided by District Court Judge Richard J. Leon. The Court issued a preliminary injunction that the good reason requirement was likely be unconstitutional and enjoined its enforcement. The order said that anyone who met the eligibility requirements for a concealed carry license absent the good reason stipulation cannot be denied the license; the order was not stayed originally, but was subsequently stayed on May 27, 2016.[7][8]
Both the Wrenn and Grace cases were consolidated before the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C. and oral arguments were held on September 20, 2016. On July 25, 2017, in a 2-1 decision, the court invalidated the 'good reason' requirement. The decision was put on hold to allow D.C. to appeal.[9][10][11] D.C. filed its appeal for rehearing en banc on August 24, 2017.[12]
On July 24, 2014, DC's ban on open and concealed carry was struck down as unconstitutional in Palmer v. District of Columbia.[2] Initially Judge Frederick Scullin, Jr. did not issue a stay of his ruling. For a brief period of time, Judge Scullin's ruling effectively legalized permitless open and concealed carry with a valid firearm registration card, and non-residents with valid carry permits issued by their home states could carry openly or concealed in the District. But on July 29, 2014 Scullin issued an order that retroactively stayed the ruling until October 22, 2014.[3][4] In response to the ruling, a Restrictive May-Issue concealed carry licensing law was enacted in September 2014. Under the new law, an applicant must show "good reason," to qualify for a concealed carry permit. However, on May 18, 2015, the "good reason" requirement was ruled as likely unconstitutional and a preliminary injunction was issued against D.C. from enforcing that requirement in Wrenn v. District of Columbia.[5] This effectively required the District to grant licenses on a Shall-Issue basis to qualified applicants who have passed a criminal background check and completed the required firearms safety training. Judge Scullin did not issue a stay of his ruling, but the Appeals Court did so on June 12, 2015, effectively leaving the restrictive 'good reason' requirement in place while litigation continues.[6] It was later ruled that Judge Scullin, a visiting judge from New York, was outside his jurisdiction because he was only appointed to decide the Palmer case, not the follow-up Wrenn case. The Wrenn case was subsequently reassigned and the new judge denied the request for a preliminary injunction.
On May 17, 2016 a separate case (Grace v. District of Columbia) was decided by District Court Judge Richard J. Leon. The Court issued a preliminary injunction that the good reason requirement was likely be unconstitutional and enjoined its enforcement. The order said that anyone who met the eligibility requirements for a concealed carry license absent the good reason stipulation cannot be denied the license; the order was not stayed originally, but was subsequently stayed on May 27, 2016.[7][8]
Both the Wrenn and Grace cases were consolidated before the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C. and oral arguments were held on September 20, 2016. On July 25, 2017, in a 2-1 decision, the court invalidated the 'good reason' requirement. The decision was put on hold to allow D.C. to appeal.[9][10][11] D.C. filed its appeal for rehearing en banc on August 24, 2017.[12]
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
You are batting 0 for 2.... - Tigrrrr! MU - 9/25 09:06:24