With the 9th Circuit ruling in Peruta, Guam, Hawaii, and the Northern Mariana Islands can no longer sustain heavy restrictions on the ownership and carry of handguns. Guam has already reformed its law. Hawaii now has a ruling against it and is waiting to see what happens with the Peruta decision. Now the Northern Mariana Islands have had a lawsuit filed against them to repeal the total ban there on the ownership and carry of handguns. It’s hard to see how such a ban can stand, given the decisions in Heller, McDonald, and Peruta . . .
The lawsuit has been filed by two residents, Li-Rong Radich and David Radich and is supported by the Second Amendment Foundation, the NRA Civil Rights Legal Defense Fund and Hawaii Defense Foundation.
“The Second Amendment does not just apply to the continental United States and Hawaii,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “It also applies to territories under U.S. jurisdiction. The issue is a fundamental civil right, not only to possess a handgun, but also to use firearms for self-defense purposes, which is currently banned in the Northern Marianas.”
The territories administered by the United States should be included in any national reciprocity scheme for the carry of handguns.
©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Gun Watch
filed just in time for some hearings around the holidays. .. . nice and warm. wonder if they have to wear a suit and tie or if flip-flops and shorts with a nice hawaiian shirt is cool for courtroom attire.
The federal court for the Mariana Islands requires lawyers to wear shoes.
in some places, flip flops count as shoes.
Maybe the the determinant is wearing socks?
Gene – Sorry. Too Japanese…. [snicker]
Why not go after the CA bans? I mean besides the microstamping nonsense?
All in time. I’m currently stuck in Alameda County, CA, so Peruta might as well not exist for me until SCOTUS upholds it. But someday soon, if not soon enough.
Me and you both. I understand that since Peruta Guam has gone ahead and started shall issue. Our time will get here. But it will have to be court orders. No way will CA pols let it happen it’s forced on them.
Doubt the anti gunterds saw this coming, but I like it, then go after the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and eventually the District of Columbia as once precedent is set in US territories D.C. loses some of its percevied leverage, LOL!
You win the multiple small wins and set precedent in the lower courts, which will be challenged and then to draw that specific issue into the eventual writ of certorari issue into the US Supreme court! Just like they have done in the previous cases!
How does on eat an elephant, one bite at a time.
Then when precedent is set you have eroded the base of much of the Kalifornila communists arguement, and you start stripping them back…LOL!
Hasn’t Puerto Rico been dealt with already?
We’re not eating an elephant. We’re creating more elephants. Precedents are being set giving credence to privileges in place of rights thereby eroding the Second Amendment. We’re saying to our government that it was correct all along that it could infringe because words don’t mean anything concrete in the Constitution. We’re telling government that whatever excuse, no matter how flimsy (commerce clause anyone?), will eventually be accepted by the People if government drags it out long enough. In the end, this is a bullshit trade of real and proper rights for petty privileges. These are foolish bargains.
I definitely agree. As far as I’m concerned any laws wether deemed “good” or bad are in fact all bad. As our basis for law in the republic states anything not enumerated to the Feds goes to the state & to the people. With the most important issue of criminal law being corpus delicti and holding to the rules of common law, which all local, federal & district courts obviously do not honor or at the very least try to avoid at all costs. State filing as the victim in cases without a corpus delicti, judges practicing law from the bench, etc. Totally corrupted by power & let run rampant by an ignorant, distracted people.
CGF, SAF and NRA are handling California. There’s nothing saying we can’t file lawsuits as needed. This is going to be one of the easier cases for our side to win.
If this case reaches the 9th circuit, it will help California.
Thanks Gray!
Gray,
The article I wrote explained CNMI’s gun ban in more detail. They must have decided not to publish it. As you well know when we planned this, the CNMI’s gun laws make Washington DC’s old gun laws and Chicago’s old gun laws look like Vermont.
There are a number of lawsuits pending against various laws. In addition to Peruta is a companion case called Richards v. Prieto, Prieto being the sheriff of Placer County. There are so cases pending, as I recall, in San Bernardino and one other neighboring county in the trial stages, and at least one other on the CCW filed by John Birdt–I think his is against LA, and it is buried in the Ninth Circuit purgatory. A trial court judgment just came down striking the waiting period for those who already own guns, or have a COE or CCW. (There is still a wait until the state clears the background check, but it will be nearly instantaneous for some, 6-8 days for others). Riverside County Sheriff has been asked to modify his policy “or else,” but he has yet to announce promised revisions. Appeals are pending respecting the SF ordinance outlawing possession of any “plus ten” round magazines by anyone except on duty police (the state mag ban does not apply to mags made prior to 2001), as well as a challenge to the ordinance that ) res any loaded handgun in your home to be your person or unloaded and securely stored–whether anyone else lives with you or not.
Exactly. CA, NY, CT, IL – all these states are getting ass raped by the politicians and he chooses this?? WTF??!!
So what have YOU done for the Second Amendment?
Get off your lazy ass and do 1% of the work that the SAF has done, and then maybe we’ll pay attention to your pathetic whining.
I would suspect prudent gun cleaning in order to combat all that salt air.
SAF is always there, and first to help gun owners, and those who want to be. I saw they should be the 600 lb gorilla in the room. Rather then the NRA. Just my 2 cents worth. 🙂
SAF does a good job, but don’t forget that when the NRA was fighting against Manchin-Toomey, the SAF was supporting it.
SAF lost credibility with me over that move.
Ditto.
Not relevant. However if you do not want to donate to SAF, the other two supporting organizations to this case were the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund and the Hawaii Defense Foundation. HDF especially dug down deep to donate and they don’t have a huge amount of financial backing.
http://www.hawaiidefensefoundation.org/donate/
https://www.nradefensefund.org/donate.aspx
Why isn’t it relevant?
SteveInCO,
It’s not relevant to this case because they are not plaintiff-parties in this case. The subject of this news article is inaccurate.
It was Jared (who guest writes here at TTAG and did a more specific write up on our history with this case, which for some reason has not been published yet) and I who brainstormed the case for the last 6 years, since Heller was decided by SCOTUS in 2008.
We essentially had to wait until someone complained about the law because we did not know anyone there. Of course, as the “People of the Gun” here know, a place with a total handgun possession and carry ban would eventually have a home invasion or some sort of horrible crime or tragedy and cause someone to ask the question: If DC residents can have handguns in the home to stop a home invader, why can’t we?
David Radich, the second plaintiff, posted on a web forum that Jared and I frequent about his situation and what happened to his wife. It was then that we resolved to:
A) Find national 2A counsel (This part was easy, David Sigale was co-counsel for McDonald, Moore, Ezell….)
B) Get funding for counsel, from any lawful source (We asked several organizations for help, only 3 did).
C) Get local counsel (This part was extremely difficult and took nearly two years by itself to do, because CNMI is basically a set of 3 cities on islands with 53,000 people on them, isolated from the rest of the world, and it’s population has not much of a gun culture, unlike Guam).
The dramas involving Alan Gottlieb or CCRKBA over Manchin-Toomey simply have no applicability here and is entirely irrelevant. Multiple organizations were asked to fund this case, and 3 of them did. SAF was one of them.
If you want to help this case but do not want to donate anything to SAF, I offered HDF as a primary 501(c)(3) that should be donated (it was more of a financial stretch for them to fund this case than it was for NRA CRDF or SAF) or secondarily the NRA CRDF.
I have only come to realize over the last year just how much SAF is doing on so many fronts both large and small. It is really amazing when you stop to consider how much work they do and how many victories are a direct result of their legal filings. Definitely worth monthly financial support at any level. Those who have not done so, need to check out their website.
https://www.saf.org/
If you use Amazon Smile (smile.amazon.com) you can choose SAF as your charity and they’ll get a donation for you purchases.
The NRA, or more specifically the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund, partially funded this lawsuit. Hawaii Defense Foundation kicked in money, too, and SAF handled the rest.
These days no single organization takes anything on alone. There’s a place for all at the bench.
I suspect that the reason for these gun bans in the Northern Marianas, USVI, Guam and Hawaii have a lot to do with the fact that the population is non-white. You know how gun control works: “We can’t trust these coloreds with guns”
Guam never had a gun ban, per se, open carry license was always shall issue. The ccw just changed from May issue to shall issue this year.
Northern Mariana takes it a step further than that…. 60% of the population are migrant workers who have almost no rights and no possibility to ever become citizens. And that’s where your “made in USA” Levi’s come from.
The restrictions in the Mariana Islands make New Jersey and New York look like Second Amendment paradises. You can only own a shotgun in .410 or a .22 rifle. Anything else is highly restricted or banned outright
I am 100% against a national reciprocity law. The answer is to protect gun rights of individuals, not to enable the federal government to make more gun laws. Less laws, more freedom.
Wrong article, Skyler?
American Samoa will be the tough one to crack i think. They have the same restrictions as the Northern Mariana Islands but have never been assign to a federal judicial circuit. Your only choice would be to go through the local territorial courts and then appeal to SCOTUS.
American Samoa does not have the same gun laws as CNMI. They allow for more shotguns but they do not allow for .223
AS cases have been heard in the 9th circuit and the D.C. Circuit.
AS is being dealt with, but Gray and I already turn one territory from an internet pow-wow into a lawsuit. Someone else is handling American Samoa.
“The Second Amendment does not just apply to the continental United States and Hawaii,”
It does not apply necessarily to geographic areas, it applies to the United States Federal Government. The constitution defines the governments structure, delegates powers to the different parts of government, denies the government any powers that are not delegated, and prohibits the use of legitimately delegated powers towards certain effects, such as stifling free speech or restricting ownership of arms.
Every possible interaction a citizen has with the federal government is a 10th amendment issue, after that it may also be a 1st or 2nd, 3d etc, amendment issue.
Holy Crap, David Radich, I know that guy! Used to be in some Battlestar fan forums I used to frequent. Small world!
Comments are closed.