February 6th, 2016


kolbe v. hogan

“For perspective, we note that in 2012, the number of AR and AK-style weapons manufactured and imported into the United States was more than double the number of Ford F-150 trucks sold, the most commonly sold vehicle in the United States.”

“In our view, ‘the right to possess firearms for protection implies a corresponding right’ to possess component parts necessary to make the firearms operable. […] This reasoning applies to the magazines in question. […] In short, magazines and other forms of ammunition have long been recognized as arms.”

“The proper standard under Helleris whether the prohibited weapons and magazines are ‘typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes’ as a matter of history and tradition, not whether the magazines are often actually employed in self-defense incidents.”

Heller refers to “dangerous” and “unusual” conjunctively, suggesting that even a dangerous weapon may enjoy constitutional protection if it is widely employed for lawful purposes, i.e., not unusual.”

“To select the proper level of scrutiny, we consider ‘the nature of the conduct being regulated and the degree to which the challenged law burdens the right.’”

“(The right to bear arms, however venerable, is qualified by what one might call the ‘who,’ ‘what,’ ‘where,’ ‘when,’ and ‘why.’)”

“At stake here is a ‘basic right,’ McDonald, 561 U.S. at 767, ‘that the Framers and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment counted … among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty,’ id. at 778.”

“… under the Seventh Circuit’s view, a significant restriction on a fundamental right might be justified by benefits that are quite literally imagined into existence.”

“The meaning of the Constitution does not depend on a popular vote of the circuits and it is neither improper nor imprudent for us to disagree with the other circuits addressing this issue. We are not a rubber stamp. We require strict scrutiny here not because it aligns with our personal policy preferences but because we believe it is compelled by the law set out in Heller and Chester.”
William Byrd Traxler, Jr., Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit since 2009;

nominated to the federal bench by President George H.W. Bush in 1991;

nominated to the Fourth Circuit by President Bill Clinton in 1998;

Kolbe v. Hogan (4th Cir. 2016)


My tweets

Collapse )

Neurologist explains why it’s hard to look at Ted Cruz’s creepy ‘unsettling’ face

Neurologist explains why it’s hard to look at Ted Cruz’s creepy ‘unsettling’ face

As he has risen in the polls, more attention is being paid to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s overall electability as a man who looks, as one fellow Princeton classmate described him: “about as telegenic as an undertaker.”

Posted by Michael Zeleny on 6 Feb 2016, 22:04

from Facebook