Federal Ban on Interstate sale of Handguns Ruled Unconstitutional

Alan Gura and the Second Amendment Foundation have achieved another significant victory toward restoring second amendment rights.  In the federal District Court in Dallas, United States Judge Reed O’Connor ruled that the interstate ban on handgun sales by federally licensed dealers is unconstitutional.  From the ruling(PDF):

IV.
CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, it is ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for lack of standing (ECF No. 15) is DENIED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 21) is GRANTED, and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 15) is DENIED.

Accordingly, the Court DECLARES that 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3), 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a) are UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and Defendants are ENJOINED from enforcing these provisions. The Court will issue its final judgment separately.

SO ORDERED on this 11th day of February, 2015.

 The court also ruled that the law was unconstitutional on its face, under strict scrutiny:

 Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that Defendants have not shown that the federal interstate handgun transfer ban is narrowly tailored to be the least restrictive means of achieving the Government’s goals under current law. The federal interstate handgun transfer ban is therefore unconstitutional on its face.

The Court further finds, in the alternative, the federal interstate handgun transfer ban is unconstitutional when applied to the facts of this case. The essence of an as-applied challenge is the claim that the manner in which a statute was applied to the plaintiff in a particular circumstance violated the Constitution. See In re Cao, 619 F.3d 410, 434 (5th Cir. 2010); Khachaturian v. Fed. Election Comm’n, 980 F.2d 330, 331 (5th Cir. 1992). Texas law allows the sale of handguns to residents of other states, and the District of Columbia does not prohibit the importation of firearms as long as they are registered. See D.C. Code § 7-2502.01(a) (2014). Further, based on the undisputed facts in this case, the Hansons are fully qualified under federal, District of Columbia, and Texas law to purchase and possess handguns, and the Hansons each identified a handgun in Mance’s inventory that is legal for them to possess and bring into the District of Columbia. As discussed above, requiring that the Hansons pay additional costs and fees and wait until they return to the District of Columbia to retrieve their firearms from Sykes amounts to a regime that is not narrowly tailored to achieve the Government’s compelling interest. Accordingly, the federal interstate handgun transfer ban is unconstitutional as applied to Plaintiffs.

 The Court also found that the law failed under the standards for strict scrutiny, and that the law violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.

This is only at the district court level.  It is almost certain that this ruling will be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, of which Texas is a part.

This ruling only applies to FFL transfers of handguns.   It does not apply to private sales of handguns.  Still, it is a significant step away from the centralization of all regulation and power by the federal government.

©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch