Updated 6:01 p.m. |
For all practical
purposes, a
federal judge’s weekend ruling that overturned local laws prohibiting
District of Columbia residents from carrying guns outside of their
homes has opened the door for non-residents to tote handguns into the
city and has made it potentially easier for members and staffers to
transport firearms across the District to the Capitol.
D.C. police have been ordered not to arrest people for carrying pistols
and deadly weapons in public. Washingtonians can still face criminal
charges for carrying unregistered firearms and ammunition, but the
millions of people who visit the nation’s capital are exempt from those
provisions under an order from Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L.
Lanier. The chief’s guidance effectively put the District’s firearm
regulations, at least for non-residents, on a par with the most
permissive gun jurisdictions in the country. D.C. police got additional
guidance from Lanier on Monday afternoon. She clarified that the ruling
applies only to handguns, not long guns or shotguns that are still
illegal, and that committing crimes with handguns remains illegal.
For non-residents, legal possession of a handgun in D.C. is based on
the laws of their home jurisdiction, meaning D.C. police will be
responsible for knowing and enforcing licensing and permitting
restrictions from around the country. Lanier noted that additional
information on gun laws in other states will be forthcoming and said
that in the meantime, officers can call a 24-hour information line.
Lanier’s orders came in response to Judge Frederick Scullin Jr.’s July
26 ruling in Palmer v. District of Columbia that D.C.’s complete ban on
the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. In the 19-page
decision, Scullin wrote that he was stopping enforcement of the law
“unless and until” the city adopted a constitutionally valid licensing
mechanism.
In her follow-up guidance to officers, Lanier nodded to the confusion.
“Unfortunately, this ruling has left many unanswered legal questions
that are currently being reviewed by the [Office of the Attorney
General],” she stated.
Federal laws and a portion of D.C. code still prohibit people from
carrying weapons on Capitol grounds, according to Capitol Police
spokeswoman Lt. Kimberly Schneider. But members and staffers already
have weapons privileges for the Capitol campus dating back decades.
Although the D.C. prohibition against firearms was put into place in
1975, members of Congress and their staffs have the legal right to bear
arms on the Hill. Capitol Police Board regulations established in 1967
permit members and their aides to transport licensed firearms on the
Capitol grounds in the course of carrying out their official duties,
provided the weapons are “unloaded and securely wrapped.”
Although the regulations expressly prohibit weapons on the floor of
either chamber, as well as in the adjacent lobbies, cloakrooms and
galleries, individual members can “maintain firearms within the
confines of [their] office.”
Before Lanier issued her order on Sunday, members and aides might have
had to violate District law to transport a handgun to the Hill.
“Easing gun restrictions in the District of Columbia whether by court
ruling or by regulation, certainly eases the way weapons are
transported through the District,” said a former high-ranking Capitol
Hill law enforcement official who spoke on background about the
potential impact of the law.
On Monday afternoon, D.C. Attorney General Irvin B. Nathan filed a
motion to stay the effectiveness of the opinion.
Alan Gura, the lawyer who argued against D.C.’s gun law on behalf of
the nonprofit Second Amendment Foundation, said the case had nothing to
do with the Hill, but he expects members of Congress will be playing
close attention to the outcome.
“As part-time residents of the District of Columbia,” Gura told CQ Roll
Call, members can now enjoy “a greater measure of freedom in their
lives,” thanks to the ruling.
The Supreme Court’s 5-4 District of Columbia v. Heller decision made
clear that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to gun
ownership within the home. It also recognized that guns may be banned
or controlled in certain “sensitive places,” including schools and
government buildings.
Gura thinks a legal challenge to the federal and local laws prohibiting
people from carrying guns on the Capitol grounds would be “far-fetched”
under the Heller precedent and said it wasn’t a case he would argue.
Republicans in Congress have tried to overturn the city’s gun laws, to
the outrage of locally elected officials.
D.C. Councilmember David Catania, a mayoral candidate running as an
independent, said in a statement that strong gun control laws are
critical to the District’s public safety, “a fact supported by the ban
on possessing guns in federal buildings, on the grounds of the U.S.
Capitol, and Congressional office buildings.”
“Having more guns on our streets does not make us safer and a rushed
roll back of our laws will only result in confusion and create
additional challenges for law enforcement in the District,” he said.
“Once again, the democratic will of District residents and their
elected leadership is being marginalized and threatened by those who
know little about our city and the nearly 650,000 people who call it
home.”
Democratic mayoral nominee Muriel Bowser, who represents Ward 4 on the
D.C. Council, said the ruling was “troubling and poses a serious threat
to public safety in the District of Columbia” and vowed to fight for
gun safety legislation.
In the wake of the ruling, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C., chided
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., for his attempt to roll back gun laws in the
District.
“With two people arrested in the last two weeks for bringing guns into
the Capitol complex, both of whom were charged under D.C.’s carry law,
Representative Massie can no longer hide behind that D.C. law,” she
said in a statement. “The only thing standing between guns and the
Capitol now is a federal law. Will Rep. Massie be consistent and
finally try to overturn a law he has legitimate, direct jurisdiction
over?”
Norton said she expects the District to appeal the decision, which goes
beyond what the Supreme Court has held. The U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia has upheld the constitutionality
of three of the District’s four major gun laws, she pointed out.
Massie told CQ Roll Call he was encouraged by the judge’s decision.
“In fact, his ruling strikes down a provision of the DC Firearms
Registration Amendment Act of 2008, which I specifically referenced in
the text of my successful amendment on July 16th,” Massie said in an
email. “Clearly, Ms. Norton and the Mayor missed the mark when they
asserted that my legislative effort to restore a fundamental human
right was an overextension of congressional authority.”
He cited Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution as
evidence of authority over D.C.’s legislative matters, and said the
ruling “re-affirmed my assertion that the peoples’ right to keep and
bear arms cannot be denied by any locality or state.”
