D.C. Asks Federal Court to Erase Second Amendment Opinion Recognizing Right to Carry

Back in July, the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia
struck down Washington, D.C.’s ban on carrying handguns in
public. Pointing to the Supreme Court’s recent Second Amendment
jurisprudence, the district court observed, “there is no longer any
basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of
Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use
handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of
scrutiny. Therefore,” the district court held in
Palmer v. D.C., “the District of Columbia’s complete
ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional.”

On Monday the D.C. government filed a
new motion with that same court, asking for a reconsideration
of the July ruling “because of a number of errors of law.”
According to D.C., the district court erred both by showing too
little deference to local gun control laws and by holding that the
right to carry arms in public falls within the scope of the Second
Amendment in the first place. “The Court unnecessarily determined
that the right to carry a handgun in public is at the core of the
Second Amendment, and failed to consider both the historical
pedigree of prohibitions on public carrying and the District’s
important justifications for its prohibition,” the city’s motion
for reconsideration asserts.

It’s a weak ploy. Like it or not, Judge Frederick Scullin’s
opinion in Palmer v. D.C. is a careful piece of work.
There’s nothing in it that rises to the level of “errors of law.”
The District of Columbia should face legal reality and stop trying
to dodge the Second Amendment.

For more on D.C.’s gun control regime, see Reason TV’s “Girls,
Guns, and the Problem with D.C. Firearm Laws.”