Dickens V Ryan, 9th Cir, Aug 2012 - "Carrying a gun, ... a Second Amendment right"

[Librarian]

Just put up by Eugene Volokh, http://www.volokh.com/2012/08/04/jud...endment-right/

Didn't start as a 2A case, and the opinion isn't about 2A.

Case: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...3/08-99017.pdf

[wash]

Wow, I like that quote.

I have no idea if it will help up (I'm not optimistic on this one), but it's good to see a 9'th circuit judge thinking this way.

It's too bad that this judge could only acknowledge the right to carry for a killer instead of a law abiding citizen seeking a license.

[speedrrracer]

For us legally-impaired, is that beneficial in that it can be "cited" or somehow used in other cases?

[OleCuss]

It can be cited. It can be influential.

However, as you know, it is not precedential.

[SilverTauron]

Perhaps my understanding of legal theory is too flawed to support this statement, but consider the location of the court in question.

Now, lets compare that to judicial rulings in California and NY. In theory the law is supposed to be equal regardless of where one's state is. The observed reality of matters appears that judges rule as their cultural norms dictate. The norm in Arizona is permissive exercise of the RKBA to all, thus a ruling supporting that. The norm in NY and CA is that only connected agents of the state carry, and thus rulings echo that cultural reality.

This explains the persistence of anti RKBA courts in denying recognition of the RKBA by any means necessary, even if the justices must warp the law to support their cultural biases.

[HowardW56]

The quote is interesting: "Carrying a gun, which is a Second Amendment right, also cannot legally lead to a finding that the individual is likely to murder someone; if it could, half or even more of the people in some of our states would qualify as likely murderers."

What I find more intrieguing, is that the quote comes from Judge Reinhardt's dissent.

[Dreaded Claymore]

It's important to note that this is in a dissent.

[HowardW56]

It's important to note that this is in a dissent.

Absolutely but I see it as a shift in the Judges position on the Second Amendment..

[Dreaded Claymore]

Oh, it's definitely a good thing. The judge is reminding everyone that, even if someone commits a crime, carrying a firearm isn't always something to punish them for.

[dustoff31]

Absolutely but I see it as a shift in the Judges position on the Second Amendment..

It is a change in his position, but is it a change in heart? And is it permanent?

Does he now really believe the 2A means what it says? Or is he simply mouthing the words to justify his dissent in the case?

[Gray Peterson]

Listen to the oral arguments to in Fisher v. City of San Jose. Reinhardt indicated the 2A to be an individual right.

He's changed his mind for real.

[dustoff31]

Listen to the oral arguments to in Fisher v. City of San Jose. Reinhardt indicated the 2A to be an individual right.

He's changed his mind for real.

Well, that's good.

[HowardW56]

Listen to the oral arguments to in Fisher v. City of San Jose. Reinhardt indicated the 2A to be an individual right.

He's changed his mind for real.

[OleCuss]

Again, not precedential, but influential.

This really may not reflect the position of a judge. It may reflect a changing mindset for at least a minority of the court. And such statements (assuming the judge is well-respected) can help to change the minds of other judges.

No precedent, but it could lead to helpful precedents in the future.

[Gray Peterson]

Well, that's good.

Considering his original decision in Silveira, many of you are probably shocked.

Oral Arguments for Fisher v. City of San Jose

Reinhardt extensively spoke in the oral arguments. I believe he was one of the dissent, too, in that case.

I would love Reinhardt to be on the panel, and for him of all people to wrote a majority opinion striking down good cause and good moral character. That would send shockwaves throughout the country, and if you know anything about the decision Reinhardt has written, you know why.