Second Amendment takes another hit from D.C. Court of Appeals

Gun - Constitution - FlagIn 1975, the right to own a handgun in Washington, D.C. was illegal. In addition, all other firearms such as rifles and shotguns had to be “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock,” making them useless in the event that the gun owner needed to defend himself.

However, in a 2008 5-4 decision–please note: that was 5-4, not unanimous–led by the now deceased Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the law was a violation of the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment. And though this ruling was specific to the District of Columbia, the Supreme Court reinforced the Heller decision in McDonald v. City of Chicago in 2010; a case involving restrictions similar to those found in Heller.

With these two cases, the Supreme Court confirmed the Second Amendment rights of citizens in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. But that hasn’t stopped the anti-gun leftists from continuing to find creative ways around the Constitution. And, once again, the fight returns us to Washington, D.C.

In September 2014, several gun laws took effect in D.C. effecting gun rights in many ways, including laws regarding requirements for obtaining a concealed-carry permit. Under the new law, applications were processed under a “Restrictive-May Issue” licensing policy, requiring applicants to provide “good reason” for their request.

Of course, “may issue” and “good reason” are just code words granting government the power to say no to any applicant for any reason. In a May 17, 2016 ruling, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled in Grace et al v. District of Columbia et al that the requirement to provide “good reason” likely placed an unconstitutional burden on gun owners.

As is their right, the District of Columbia appealed the ruling to the federal appeals court where two of the three appellate judges temporarily reversed Judge Leon. In no small bit of coincidence, these two judges–Judith Rogers and Robert Wilkins–are Clinton and Obama appointees respectively.

Where this case will end is anyone’s guess, but it’s likely to reach the Supreme Court where there is currently an ideological 4-4 split until Scalia is replaced. And as you may already know, Obama’s nominee to replace Scalia is Merrick Garland, who happens to be the current Chief Judge of the D.C. Circuit Court that just reversed Judge Leon.

Oh… and he’s another Clinton appointee. Just sayin’!

I know that many in my circle who support Donald Trump will hold up his recent list of potential Supreme Court justices as proof that he will save the court, although it looked more like a bribe for Conservative votes, not to mention that he will likely be facing a Democrat-controlled Senate. In addition, Trumpster is proving to lack even a basic understanding of the Constitution.

And let’s not forget that he still thinks his pro-abortion sister would make a good justice.

Quite honestly, I think we have been hoodwinked into accepting that the Supreme Court is more important that it really is. In fact, if we were to return to our constitutional roots, they would be nothing more or less than a co-equal branch of government with the legislative and executive.

Which is one reason the Article V Convention of States project is growing in popularity, and why our vote in November needs to look beyond the Scalia replacement.


Don't Feed The RINOsDavid Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative, your source for opinion that’s politically-incorrect and always “right.” David is also a contributor to

His daily commentary is nationally syndicated via Salem Radio Network.