Here we go again: Gun laws in DC

The DC Circuit, in Parker v. D.C., fresh from deciding that the executive can do whatever it wants to detained foreigners, determines that the 2d amendment inures to individuals, and concludes that the 2d amendment means:

In sum, the phrase “the right of the people,” when read intratextually and in light of Supreme Court precedent, leads us to conclude that the right in question is individual. This proposition is true even though “the people” at the time of the founding was not as inclusive a concept as “the people” today.

Comments:  DotD; ACS; 7th Sense; DCist; TechandNewHumanCondx.

SL&P notes that this opinion might make it hard to put the poor (or whoever it is that is prosecuted) in jail for longer merely because they have a gun in their possession.

On the other hand, finally, the “best” comment comes from “Fourth Amendment and FDCPA” who writes:

Words aren't enough to express the relief and jubilation that the federal courts have at last learned to read the plain language of the Constitution. This opinion may mark the beginning of the end of the bench legislation era….

(There are a couple of sentences regarding his views on what president to elect that I don’t understand.)

I thought that most lawyers were beyond calling decision they liked or did not like “legislation from the bench.” While I don’t quite know what to think of the result, considering that the 2-1 panel had to bridge several issues that they considered close, namely: 1) pre-enforcement standing; 2) whether the District of Columbia is covered by the 2d; and 3) the substance of the ambiguous 2d amendment, it is problematic to say that this result is based on the “plain language” of the constitution. In fact, the majority reaches its result by looking way beyond the plain language of the constitution.

Anyway, maybe he can share some of his “trade secrets” (as he calls them) to getting around the 4^th amendment to put the poor in jail for longer.