Post Office gun ban ruled unconstitutional

[bwade]

This is just now in the news:

"Judge rules federal law banning gun possession in post offices unconstitutional"

The article is on the Just the News website:

Judge rules federal law banning gun possession in post offices unconstitutional | Just The News

The decision is attached, click the picture below to read it.

 

[ladder13]

Some more good news.

 

[robertrwalsh]

Incrementalism is working FOR the good guys for a change.

 

[CH4]

Death by a thousand cuts is a two-way street. A real tug o war.

 

[WR Moore]

Be nice to be able to read the thumb nail. I'm already signed in, trying to sign in again isn't possible. Had to resign in to post this. $%^*!

 

[AlHunt]

For now. Don't be surprised if this gets appealed 10 times over the next 5 years until it ends up in front of SCOTUS. Justice is only for the rich in America.

 

[glowe]

A very important issue for many is the ability to mail handguns within the guidelines of the BATF, not walk into the lobby with a concealed one. That should also be unconstitutional!!

 

[Valmet]

Happy to read this- but I still dread going to the Post Office. My local PO is nearly as bad as the DMV…

 

[swsig]

I hope this decision holds up. I am so tired of having to lock my gun in my car safe whenever I have to go to the post office. Fortunately, I don't have to go to there very often anymore.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

This is another link to help folks in reading this excellent decision.

https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/klvydgelepg/01122024ayala.pdf

I'm not sure why anyone has ever locked their gun in their car when entering a Post Office. Nobody in there cares.............

 

[swsig]

I'm not sure why anyone has ever locked their gun in their car when entering a Post Office. Nobody in there cares.............

Yeah, I know. I admit I've carried in a P.O. But there's always that one time...

 

[johngalt]

Queue all those old 'going postal' stories...

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Comments from the Internet just sent to me by a friend:

Some are commenting that: At the moment it impacts only the jurisdiction of the circuit in which the ruling was issued. More narrowly, it only has immediate effect on the case, since there wasn't an injunction issued against the law itself, only a dismissal of the specific charge against 1 person.

My response:

Probably true but it won't end in the Florida District Court..................the Government is unlikely to stand for it.



Nevertheless, if it doesn't get appealed, it will be used as precedent in future cases around the country.

 

[Rotorhead1026]

I wonder who ratted out the defendant?

 

[John Patrick]

I read Judge Mizelle's whole order and disembowelment of the government's argument.

It's a great read and hopefully will form the basis for further reining in anti Constitutional restrictions.

 

[GaryS]

The District Court order can only be used as "persuasion" not precedent. It can be placed into the "Table of Authorities" in future actions.

I expect that the government will appeal this to the Circuit and then we'll see where it goes from there.

Comments from the Internet just sent to me by a friend:

 

[demkofour]

Its a great step. Its a circuit court and it's the dismissal of a criminal indictment. Lets see what appeals follow.

And, that decision conflicts with this case from Colorado…
 
reuters.com
 
With two circuit courts having different opinions it will go to supreme court.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

The District Court order can only be used as "persuasion" not precedent. It can be placed into the "Table of Authorities" in future actions.

I expect that the government will appeal this to the Circuit and then we'll see where it goes from there.

That's kinda sorta only half correct.

A district court opinions are not binding precedent on other district courts or on courts of appeals. However, a decision from the same district on the same issue is highly persuasive and will be treated as a precedent to be followed by most judges

Stolen from the Internet, I admit it. Easier than trying to come up with that very thought on my own. LAZY!!!

Moreover, it IS a precedent insofar as it exists and can be cited in another district but another district can ignore it.

But it is headed for a SCOTUS review and I'd wager that they will accept it.

 

[John Patrick]

Its a great step. Its a circuit court and it's the dismissal of a criminal indictment. Lets see what appeals follow.

And, that decision conflicts with this case from Colorado…
 
reuters.com
 
With two circuit courts having different opinions it will go to supreme court.

The case discussed in this thread is a District Court case.

But the judge wrote an unusually comprehensive Order evicerating the government's arguments and relying on Bruen.

 

[Narragansett]

Not trying to create an uproar here, but I really do not care about carrying a gun in a post office.

I would much rather be able to ship a gun through a post office

 

[Echo40]

Yeah! Take that insipid anti-gun lurkers! You can one-star every victorious thread posted here, but we're still winning! Whoo!

 

[johngalt]

I would never have expected to see gun rights getting better. Almost my entire life has been a steady chipping away by the antis. I think this illustrates the importance of taking a "no compromise" position, which up until recently the NRA was too scared to do.

 

[sniper]

Yesteryear, yesteryear...where have you gone?

I remember the "good old days" when I took my rifle into the Post Office next to my office, and they were actually happy to weigh it for me! Times sure have changed!

 

[375hh1973]

Good

I feel like such a violator when I go to the post office.

Now I will be able to sleep at night

 

[Well Armed]

Yeah! Take that insipid anti-gun lurkers! You can one-star every victorious thread posted here, but we're still winning! Whoo!

We won nothing lol. The defendant in the case got a charge dropped. He won.

 

[Racer X]

interesting Catch-22. How can a FFL take a boxed pistol into the USPS to ship it? It's both illegal, and yet expressly allowed. Mind blown!

 

[riverrat38]

Not trying to create an uproar here, but I really do not care about carrying a gun in a post office.

I would much rather be able to ship a gun through a post office

You might care, if, like me, you went to the PO on foot, or on a bicycle. Am I supposed to lay my revolver on the sidewalk whilst I get my mail? Do the law makers think that someone going "postal" is going to read the no firearms in a Federal building poster, and say something like "au shucks, I guess I can't commit multiple felonies here", and leave. The same people who want all of us to leave our cars at home and use alternate transportation make it so we legally can't!
If cities like New York won't allow carry on public transportation, that is saying most people can't carry, since, as I understand it, thats how people get around in large cities. There is no provision for checking arms, like on an airplane trip. And, yes, I also would like to be able to ship my legal guns via the post office. If they want to run a background check on me through the FBI, they can do it themselves, at no cost to me. Does shipping mean the same as "keeping and bearing"? That is one for the courts to ponder.

73,
Rick

 

[CH4]

interesting Catch-22. How can a FFL take a boxed pistol into the USPS to ship it? It's both illegal, and yet expressly allowed. Mind blown!

It's not just handguns, it's all firearms. So the contradiction would include everyday Joes carrying in long guns to ship. That said, I haven't read the statute to see if there's an exemption for shipping guns.

 

[ColbyBruce]

interesting Catch-22. How can a FFL take a boxed pistol into the USPS to ship it? It's both illegal, and yet expressly allowed. Mind blown!

A boxed handgun is a parcel, which must be accompanied by a Form 1508.

 

[bushmaster1313]

A young judge who clerked for Judge Clarence Thomas after law school and was nominated by President Donald Trump.

This is a very important decision as it allowed an ordinary person to carry a firearm in a U.S. Government Building.

But please, DO NOT rely on the District Judge's Opinion in this particular case. Yes, it is persuasive legal authority--but it is not binding on other cases. The District Judge did not enjoin the enforcement of the law. A different District Judge in a different case is not bound by this Judge's Opinion in this case.

If and when the law is held to violate the Constitution by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in your Circuit, or the Supreme Court, only then should you start thinking about carrying in a Post Office.