PDA

View Full Version : (OR) Oregon Court of Appeals Strikes down student carry ban!


Gray Peterson
09-28-2011, 6:22 PM
Hot off the Presses! (http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A142974.pdf)

Excellent ruling purely based on state preemption. Employees cannot carry, but students and visitors now can.

HowardW56
09-28-2011, 6:30 PM
Wow.....:rolleyes:

Ubermcoupe
09-28-2011, 6:38 PM
freaking awesome! :)

7x57
09-28-2011, 6:41 PM
Hmm. An irresponsibly brief skim of the first page makes me wonder if the judge was quite happy to find it preempted so as not to have to even touch the 2A claim.

7x57

taperxz
09-28-2011, 6:43 PM
Hmm. An irresponsibly brief skim of the first page makes me wonder if the judge was quite happy to find it preempted so as not to have to even touch the 2A claim.

7x57

And he shouldn't want to! Why mess with perfection;)

Dreaded Claymore
09-28-2011, 6:47 PM
Thank goodness. When the student carry bill failed to pass in Arizona, I thought perhaps that fight wouldn't be able to succeed. There's hope yet!

onedavetoomany
09-28-2011, 6:51 PM
Does this ruling allow open carry?

Nor-Cal
09-28-2011, 6:53 PM
Really good news to hear!

Bend
09-28-2011, 7:12 PM
Does this ruling allow open carry?

Yes, if you have an LTC/CCW/CHL.

Dead*Reckoned
09-28-2011, 7:42 PM
Ridiculous, why should students have the right to defend themselves like any other citizen?
:rolleyes:
As a side note, this gives also gives me hope that they will pass a similar law like this here in Arizona. Way to go Oregon!

GaryV
09-28-2011, 8:00 PM
Excellent ruling purely based on state preemption. Employees cannot carry, but students and visitors now can.

Maybe I'm just missing something (and I probably am), but it seems that this ruling strikes down the prohibition for employees as well, unless there is a separate internal employee policy. I know earlier case law allowed internal employee policies to stand, but it sounds to me like the court struck down the challenged regulation entirely, not just for certain applications, and if this regulation was the only thing keeping employees from being able to carry, wouldn't they be free to as well, at least until and unless the board passes a policy addressing the issue?

jb7706
09-28-2011, 8:17 PM
Freedom and common sense. It's a good day.

hoffmang
09-28-2011, 9:41 PM
I've long predicted that one of the ways you would know we are really #WINNING was to watch for courts to hand us victories on any basis other than the 2A.

Here is one. :43:

-Gene

Crom
09-28-2011, 10:55 PM
I've long predicted that one of the ways you would know we are really #WINNING was to watch for courts to hand us victories on any basis other than the 2A.

Here is one. :43:

-Gene

I'm glad we won. But is this nothing more than a case of Constitutional avoidance doctrine in practice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_avoidance)? My understanding is that the doctrine dictates that a federal court should refuse to rule on a constitutional issue if the case can be resolved on a nonconstitutional basis. They are only to answer one as a last resort.

I know this was a state court ruling but plaintiffs did raise the 2A issue so I am thinking the doctrine would apply here too.

Just a thought.

hoffmang
09-28-2011, 11:04 PM
I'm glad we won. But is this nothing more than a case of Constitutional avoidance doctrine in practice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_avoidance)? My understanding is that the doctrine dictates that a federal court should refuse to rule on a constitutional issue if the case can be resolved on a nonconstitutional basis. They are only to answer one as a last resort.

I know this was a state court ruling but plaintiffs did raise the 2A issue so I am thinking the doctrine would apply here too.

Just a thought.

Somewhat yes but remember what the pre-Heller days looked like. Courts would ignore the other issues and seize upon the 2A as a way to duck the case.

The times they are a changing.

-Gene

Rugerdaddy
09-29-2011, 12:39 AM
Originally Posted by onedavetoomany View Post
Does this ruling allow open carry?

Bend: Yes, if you have an LTC/CCW/CHL.

Quote from Oregonlive.com report:

"That means people with permits can pack concealed guns, said Di Saunders, spokeswoman for the university system.

"We don't have the authority to kick them off campus unless they show the weapons," she said.

But anyone brandishing a gun on campus would be approached immediately by security, she said."

Note misuse of the term brandishing....to her it means the same as "visible". At least she said they'd be "approached" and not "shot". :)

dantodd
09-29-2011, 12:58 AM
Note misuse of the term brandishing....to her it means the same as "visible". At least she said they'd be "approached" and not "shot". :)

I don't believe that she misused the term brandishing. Based on the earlier posts it is also quite legal to open carry if you have a carry license. This means that merely seeing a gun won't get you approached, it is brandishing that will get you in deep trouble.

Connor P Price
09-29-2011, 1:21 AM
The issue of campus carry was in the back of my mind all of yesterday and today because there was an incident with a disturbed young man wearing a shirt on which he had sloppily scribed "human rights violation" in sharpie ranting to himself, claiming to have a gun, and threatening to harm himself and others. This occurred on my university campus, and while I wasn't there it was still a good reminder of how unsafe "gun free schools" are. The incident was reported at about 10:30 AM, campus remained open all day, and the suspect was in custody at around 8:00PM. With that kind of response time anything can happen.

There's no reason a persons right to self defense should end when they walk on to campus just because they want an education.

Rugerdaddy
09-29-2011, 1:30 AM
I don't believe that she misused the term brandishing. Based on the earlier posts it is also quite legal to open carry if you have a carry license. This means that merely seeing a gun won't get you approached, it is brandishing that will get you in deep trouble.

She is a bit ambiguous, as she states "We don't have the authority to kick them off campus unless they show the weapons" , implying (though possibly in error)that Open Carry (OC) is not allowed. OC would "show" the weapon. Then she continues, "But anyone brandishing a gun on campus would be approached immediately by security", implying that "showing" or Open Carry is brandishing.

It may be legal in Oregon to OC with a LTC, which would make your analysis correct. Can anyone from Oregon clarify this?

Connor P Price
09-29-2011, 1:34 AM
It may be legal in Oregon to OC with a LTC, which would make your analysis correct. Can anyone from Oregon clarify this?

My understanding is that in most of Oregon it is legal to OC without a permit at all, permits are only required to conceal. However, Portland (maybe other areas as well I'm not quite sure) requires that only permit holders carry. Method of carry is not regulated for those that hold permits, they may carry concealed or openly.

HowardW56
09-29-2011, 5:32 AM
Somewhat yes but remember what the pre-Heller days looked like. Courts would ignore the other issues and seize upon the 2A as a way to duck the case.

The times they are a changing.

-Gene

I see it as the courts kicking the can down the road, not wanting to establish precedent...

They seem to have been look for an oppertunity to dispose of the case without doing the heavy lifting and giving cause to further appeals...

stix213
09-29-2011, 10:39 AM
This is excellent news

Untamed1972
09-29-2011, 11:01 AM
I see it as the courts kicking the can down the road, not wanting to establish precedent...

They seem to have been look for an oppertunity to dispose of the case without doing the heavy lifting and giving cause to further appeals...

It's that what they are supposed to do? At some point stuff shouldn't have to go to appeal.....the lower courts should get the message and just do the right thing.

A win is a win!

By ruling that state-preemption takes care of the issue aren't they really saying "The state has already protected/guaranteed your 2A rights by imposing it's preemption statute. This law violates the state's preemptive protection of your 2A rights and is hence illegal."

Gray Peterson
09-29-2011, 11:01 AM
I see it as the courts kicking the can down the road, not wanting to establish precedent...

They seem to have been look for an oppertunity to dispose of the case without doing the heavy lifting and giving cause to further appeals...

Students can now carry in the Oregon University System. Kicking the can or no, it's a win.

Crom
09-29-2011, 11:39 AM
I agree with Gray in that this is a huge win as students can legally defend themselves against criminal attack on campus if necessary. It's also keeping the Oregon State Board of Education and OUS in check. I really wish the employees could carry too.

I see it as the courts kicking the can down the road, not wanting to establish precedent...

They seem to have been look for an oppertunity to dispose of the case without doing the heavy lifting and giving cause to further appeals...

Howard, the courts are required to follow rules. And the rules dictate that they should avoid the constitutional question at all costs, only answering one as a last resort. These instructions come from the Supreme Court itself, so it's quite important. Read the first two paragraphs of the wiki article: Constitutional avoidance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_avoidance) for more info.

yellowfin
09-29-2011, 1:04 PM
The problem with Constitutional avoidance is that it has too often led to Constitutional impotence and irrelevance.

Rugerdaddy
09-29-2011, 6:51 PM
I see the University system petitioning the legislature, along with their anti-2A friends, to pass legislation prohibiting carry on campus. If that were come to pass it would end up in the courts again, this time as a 2A case- not preemption. What thinks ye? :)

gunsmith
09-30-2011, 11:32 PM
Students can now carry in the Oregon University System. Kicking the can or no, it's a win.

"carry" like open carry or only concealed? Also, why cant the employees carry?

Hardly seems fair, a good friend of mine was stalked by her ex for quite awhile and she is an employee of UNR which prohibits all LTC holders from carrying on campus, so she only carries off campus and her abusive ex knows this and can use this against her.

While I do not like many professors as they seem to be mostly supportive of racist gun laws it is important that we all have rights to carry, not just visitors and students. ... what about undergrads that may be teaching as well as being students, can they carry?

edited to ad looks like, from my non professional reading that this applies only to concealed and that the employees are subject to employer policy. LOL!

Anchors
10-20-2011, 12:16 PM
http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2011/09/oregon_court_of_appeals_reject.html

Nice!
I almost posted a new thread, but I just found this one.
Deserves a bumping to the top.

FERGUSON
10-20-2011, 12:27 PM
this is great news, but not for california......

Gray Peterson
10-20-2011, 12:36 PM
this is great news, but not for california......

If you have a LTC you can carry on college in California.

pTa
10-20-2011, 12:39 PM
If you have a LTC you can carry on college in California.

I had no idea/ Now if only all the countie swould be Shall Issue

lordres
10-20-2011, 12:47 PM
I thought most college kids were always high and/or drunk. They still couldn't carry! :rolleyes:

barracudamuscle
10-20-2011, 1:03 PM
College kids can barely afford beer and romen. Good thing is they can UOC.

goober
10-20-2011, 1:04 PM
If you have a LTC you can carry on college in California.

629.6 says as much, but if the Uni has a policy that one must get special permission to carry on campus (even w/ an LTC) does one have to do so?

command_liner
10-20-2011, 1:25 PM
Ha! I have my LTC in Oregon so I can open carry in the principal's office at my
son's school.

Freedom is one of the reasons I moved out of California.

safewaysecurity
10-20-2011, 1:29 PM
If you have a LTC you can carry on college in California.

Here's the question though. if the college finds out and expels you would CGF sue?

FERGUSON
10-20-2011, 2:12 PM
If you have a LTC you can carry on college in California.

thats great for the LTC club members, what about the average joe? like i said thats great news for oregon, not california...

dantodd
10-20-2011, 2:19 PM
629.6 says as much, but if the Uni has a policy that one must get special permission to carry on campus (even w/ an LTC) does one have to do so?

To the best of my understanding


Legally don't need their special permission, law permits it rather than being silent on the issue and since CA has preemption the campus couldn't have you removed but.... they could fire/expel employees/students for violating policy.

Gray Peterson
10-20-2011, 2:39 PM
Here's the question though. if the college finds out and expels you would CGF sue?

Only the Board of Directors can authorize that, and since I'm not a member of the board, I cannot answer that question.

thats great for the LTC club members, what about the average joe? like i said thats great news for oregon, not california...

You act as if the entire state is Maryland or New Jersey. Given that half of the state's counties are friendly to issuance (though to be fair, that only makes up about one-third of the state's population), there are average joes with LTC's.

To the best of my understanding


Legally don't need their special permission, law permits it rather than being silent on the issue and since CA has preemption the campus couldn't have you removed but.... they could fire/expel employees/students for violating policy.

Fiscal says otherwise.

hoffmang
10-20-2011, 5:07 PM
Post a Supreme Court or CA-9 ruling on carry I expect CGF would defend non-employees who had something negative happen when they otherwise have a license to carry. You'll see a step in that direction later today. :43:

-Gene

safewaysecurity
10-20-2011, 5:14 PM
Post a Supreme Court or CA-9 ruling on carry I expect CGF would defend non-employees who had something negative happen when they otherwise have a license to carry. You'll see a step in that direction later today. :43:

-Gene

Today? As in less than 7 hours from now? As in NOT two weeks? :eek:

hoffmang
10-20-2011, 5:33 PM
Today? As in less than 7 hours from now? As in NOT two weeks? :eek:

As in, instead of posting the news, I'm replying to this post ;)

-Gene