Gun rights groups and the 2A community are calling it a “betrayal” and “one of the most anti-gun acts” ever committed. The Department of Justice asked for – and received – its request to rehear a critical case, which overturned the District of Columbia’s magazine ban. As a result, the pro-gun ruling has been vacated (struck down), and the outcome of a rehearing will likely return a decision favorable to the DOJ, which seeks to avoid a split circuit that could elevate the issue to the level of the U.S. Supreme Court.
On April 22, the D.C. Court of Appeals ordered the en banc rehearing, “on consideration of the intervenor-appellee District of Columbia’s petition…” As we previously reported, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro (representing the Department of Justice) aggressively argued against the court’s March 5 ruling, stating it would “…imperil approximately 300 pending CPWL prosecutions…” a position that unambiguously sought to uphold the gun control law, and presumably her office’s track record of prosecutions.
Pirro, a Trump appointee, has made shocking, anti-Second Amendment statements in the public forum, adding to both the perception and reality of a Trump Department of Justice that is a mixed bag on constitutional rights, with the exception of the shining star of the Second Amendment Section led by AAG Harmeet Dhillon.
En banc rehearings, especially in a court with the makeup of the D.C. Court of Appeals, more often than not, result in outcomes that favor gun control. One such prime example is the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which last week issued the order to vacate and rehear its 12th pro-2A panel decision.
The D.C. Court of Appeals, in its recent order, also directed parties to file briefs and responses over the course of the next 90 days on the subjects of the District of Columbia’s licensing and registration schemes and whether they “violate the Second Amendment.” This broadens the scope of the case and may be the only area that has the potential for a positive 2A outcome.
