Constitutional Law

Now, this is pretty brazen

I noted yesterday that NRA won its suit against Philadelphia. The judge struck down two portions of the city's gun ordinance, and as to three ruled that plaintiffs' didn't have standing to sue. I.e., not that the ordinances were lawful, but that until they were enforced it was an abstract issue rather than a case. (Note that the city attorney had said she wouldn't prosecute the cases). Here's NRA's release on the case.

So the city sets out to spin, and the Philadelphia Metro buys every bit of it.

Headline: "Court gives city right to enforce some gun laws"

"A Common Pleas judge yesterday ruled in favor of three city laws passed two months ago by City Council, including the requirement of city residents to report lost and stolen guns to police."

"An appeal by the National Rifle Association, which filed the lawsuit last month, is very likely."

"The ruling was immediately hailed as a victory for Mayor Michael Nutter and the city in its fight for stronger local gun laws by the state?s leading anti-gun violence group.

Joe Grace of CeasefirePA said he hoped the ruling would also set a precedent for other cities and towns in Pennsylvania to follow."

This is pretty brazen! I'm awaiting the paper's announcement that the US lost the war in the Pacific, since, after negotiations on the deck of the U.S. Missouri, it abandoned plans to invade the country and agreed to stop fighting.

Oh, here's what makes it really pitiful. On the paper's page, in the right margin, is the AP release on the case.

Headline: "Judge tosses Philly ban on assault weapons, purchase limits"

"District Attorney Lynne Abraham has said she will follow state law and not enforce the city gun measures.

Greenspan had suggested in arguments last month that she, too, would follow that line. But she also thought the NRA might lack standing to challenge the three laws upheld Tuesday because they were not in effect and no clients had yet been harmed by them.

A lawyer for the National Rifle Association hailed Greenspan's ruling.

"The assault-weapons ban was just ridiculous," lawyer C. Scott Shields said. "There's just no way this would be enforceable.""

Full post as published by Of Arms and the Law on June 04, 2008 (boomark / email).