Steve Halbrook: Peruta Appeal Decision Ignores Context of the Law

Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals over ruled an earlier three 9th Circuit three judge panel decision and upheld the lower court decision in Peruta v. County of San Diego, ruling that the Second Amendment does not include the right to carry a concealed firearm.  San Diego appealed the three judge panel decision to the full court which heard the case about a year ago.  The summary of the ruling begins: “The en banc court affirmed the district courts’ judgments and held that there is no Second Amendment right for members of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public.” VSSA Life Member and Second Amendment attorney Steve Halbrook told NRANews yesterday that the decision completely ignores the context of the law. The judges have virtually covered their eyes while reaching it. He notes that the longest part of the decision is a discussion of the decrees of English kings, while ignoring today’s realities. 

Before the death of Scalia this was probably going to be the case that had the best chance of getting us a favorable ruling from the Supreme Court because California not only prohibits open carry but the may issue carry varies from locality to locality.  But now that the court is maybe split 4-4 (one or more of the five judges in Heller and McDonald have not wanted to hear additional cases so who knows if we can even get four on our side), I agree with Sebastian at Shall Not Be Questioned that the plaintiffs should not appeal this decision:

If Hillary wins this election, there will be no judicially enforceable Second Amendment of any meaning. That’s not hyperbole, it’s what’s going to happen. I also am very skeptical that losing three national elections in a row is going to make a lot of GOP and Dem politicians start whispering among themselves that NRA and the gun vote isn’t such the big deal they think they are.

This is one more illustration of why we must do everything we can to defeat Hillary Clinton this fall.