Judge didn't have the authority to rule in Second Amendment case, appeals court says
Image from Shutterstock.
A federal judge didn’t have the authority to rule when he found a Washington, D.C., gun law likely violated the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court has ruled.
The error was “quite understandable,” according to the decision (PDF) on Tuesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. A calendar committee assigned the case to U.S. District Judge Frederick Scullin Jr. of the Northern District of New York because it was related to another case in which Scullin presided.
Scullin was assigned the earlier case as a visiting judge by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., but Scullin didn’t have jurisdiction to decide the new case, the appeals court said. The National Law Journal (sub. req.) and the Associated Press have stories.
“We realize that we are undoing the work of litigation to date, but we have no choice,” the appeals court said. The court had raised the issue on its own.
In the earlier case, Scullin struck down a Washington, D.C., law that banned the public from carrying guns, the National Law Journal explains. Washington, D.C., lawmakers enacted a new gun law, which was challenged in the new case before Scullin.
The new law said the police chief may issue concealed carry permits “if it appears that the applicant has good reason to fear injury to his or her person or property or has any other proper reason for carrying a pistol.”
Scullin ruled (PDF) in May that there was a likelihood that the provision violated the Second Amendment. He enjoined its enforcement, but his ruling had been put on hold by the appeals court.
Alan Gura, who represents plaintiffs challenging the gun law, told the National Law Journal he was disappointed by the decision but he was prepared to continue the litigation under a new judge.
