Federal Judge Declares Interstate Handgun Transfer Ban Unconstitutional

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Is the court that decided this cover our district? How wide spread of an area would this cover?

 

[T.Lex]

Is the court that decided this cover our district? How wide spread of an area would this cover?

No, Texas, so it would be the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. (We are in the 7th Circuit.)

But, since these are federal laws, there should be a commonality of interpretation. If different circuits interpret them in different ways, that's called a "circuit split" that often draws the attention of SCOTUS. That's why I mentioned that, unless there is a split, SCOTUS may not be interested in this.

The justices generally don't take issues where there is only 1 circuit decision. They have many cases to choose from and, even if they don't necessarily agree with that decision, if no other circuits are dealing with it any differently, then there's no compelling reason to get involved.

There are, of course, exceptions.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

No, Texas, so it would be the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. (We are in the 7th Circuit.)

But, since these are federal laws, there should be a commonality of interpretation. If different circuits interpret them in different ways, that's called a "circuit split" that often draws the attention of SCOTUS. That's why I mentioned that, unless there is a split, SCOTUS may not be interested in this.

The justices generally don't take issues where there is only 1 circuit decision. They have many cases to choose from and, even if they don't necessarily agree with that decision, if no other circuits are dealing with it any differently, then there's no compelling reason to get involved.

There are, of course, exceptions.

correct me if I'm wrong...but since that was in the 5th and we're in the 7th, then wouldn't gun dealers here be held to the existing law?

 

[T.Lex]

correct me if I'm wrong...but since that was in the 5th and we're in the 7th, then wouldn't gun dealers here be held to the existing law?

That becomes an enforcement issue.

It is a federal law, enforced by federal agencies. (The decision importantly notes that state laws might still limit the ability of an out-of-state resident to purchase a firearm in-state.) The federal law is supposed to be equally applied across all states.

So, if one federal circuit calls something unconstitutional, then the federal agency is supposed to treat it as unconstitutional as applied in every state.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I admit I'm not at all familiar with evil online gun sales. Does gunbroker deal in private sales, or FFL sales?

If it's FFLs, I don't see how the ruling would remove the requirement that the sale go through at least one FFL. It merely removes the requirement for a second FFL (and subsequent FFL transfer fee) - at least, as I understand it.

Both. Anyone can sell on gunbroker.

 

[chipbennett]

Both. Anyone can sell on gunbroker.

And right now (status quo), interstate private sales without going through an FFL are... legal, rihgt?

 

[T.Lex]

And right now (status quo), interstate private sales without going through an FFL are... legal, rihgt?

Depends on each state's laws.

 

[Beowulf]

If you mean, I sit in my house in Indiana and have Big Jim mail it to me without the 4473 and the NICS check?

No.

Hence the question. If you are physically present at the out of state gun shop, it's pretty clear the mechanics would be the same as for a long gun today.

If you are in Indiana and you order from KYGCo in Kentucky, how would that work? Could I mail them a completed 4473 and a copy of my driver's license, or would I have to do that in person for them to verify who I am? I guess that honestly may be up to the ATF.

Actually, though, there is an e-form 4473 apparently. I'm not sure how it is used and the site isn't very clear. I know there is an online background check option, so this might be tied to that:

https://www.atf.gov/content/firearms/firearms-industry/applications-eform-4473

 

[BehindBlueI's]

And right now (status quo), interstate private sales without going through an FFL are... legal, rihgt?

I *think* handguns have to go through FFL and no idea on long guns. I am certainly not sure though.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

And right now (status quo), interstate private sales without going through an FFL are... legal, rihgt?

No. Perhaps you mean INTRAstate?

Intra=within Indiana, no FFL needed.

Inter=crossing state lines, FFL needed!

In private sales, if you see state lines in the fact pattern, FFL needed.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

And right now (status quo), interstate private sales without going through an FFL are... legal, rihgt?

I *think* handguns have to go through FFL and no idea on long guns. I am certainly not sure though.

I believe all interstate transfers must go through an ffl, (with exceptions for bequests in wills and intestate transfers). Long guns can be transferred through an ffl in another state depending on state laws. Handguns must go through an ffl in the state the person receiving the handgun lives in.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

If you are in Indiana and you order from KYGCo in Kentucky, how would that work? Could I mail them a completed 4473 and a copy of my driver's license

Wargame it out. Can you mail in a 4473 and a copy of your DL to an Indiana dealer now?

If, big if, upheld on appeal, it would mean that you would go to your gun store of choice in Kentucky or Tennessee or Oregon, fill out the 4473 and show your DL, pay for it, pass the NICS check and work out the door with it.

 

[Beowulf]

Wargame it out. Can you mail in a 4473 and a copy of your DL to an Indiana dealer now?

If, big if, upheld on appeal, it would mean that you would go to your gun store of choice in Kentucky or Tennessee or Oregon, fill out the 4473 and show your DL, pay for it, pass the NICS check and work out the door with it.

Good point.

So, this really doesn't fully break down the barriers to interstate commerce. It just erodes the edges a bit (still better than nothing, I guess).

 

[chipbennett]

No. Perhaps you mean INTRAstate?

Intra=within Indiana, no FFL needed.

Inter=crossing state lines, FFL needed!

In private sales, if you see state lines in the fact pattern, FFL needed.

Nope; I meant interstate - and honestly didn't know; thus the question mark.

 

[actaeon277]

Waiting for the inevitable wailing of the shrews when MDA starts whining about this.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

No. Perhaps you mean INTRAstate?

Intra=within Indiana, no FFL needed.

Inter=crossing state lines, FFL needed!

In private sales, if you see state lines in the fact pattern, FFL needed.

Isn't there some exception for long guns in bordering states? Or am I thinking of something completely different?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Isn't there some exception for long guns in bordering states? Or am I thinking of something completely different?

\

Think of two parallel railroad tracks. One is private long gun sales; the other track is entitled FFL sales.

If private, cannot cross state lines, unless FFL involved.

If buying from FFL, can cross state lines.

 

[HoughMade]

...A new AG could decide that this isn't a case worth pursuing and just accepting the judgment. That'd basically be game over - win.

...a win in Northern District of Texas or the 5th Circuit, depending upon how far it has gotten.....but only, at most, persuasive authority here.

Be careful out there, my friends, you don't want to have to make precedent with your name across the "v" from 'The United States of America".

 

[T.Lex]

\

Think of two parallel railroad tracks. One is private long gun sales; the other track is entitled FFL sales.

If private, cannot cross state lines, unless FFL involved.

If buying from FFL, can cross state lines.

Is that under federal law? I also seem to recall something about how some states allowed purchases in neighboring states. I'm thinking it was out west, so someone in Texas could go to New Mexico, buy a gun, and bring it back.

But, again, just because state law might allow something, doesn't mean federal law does, too.

...a win in Northern District of Texas or the 5th Circuit, depending upon how far it has gotten.....but only, at most, persuasive authority here.

Well, technically, yes. But in my experience with federal laws with national application, a circuit opinion on that law means 1 of 2 things: that interpretation is applied everywhere or a split develops that is resolved (one way or another) by SCOTUS.

For this example, from an enforcement angle, it would be a tricky logistical puzzle to allow those transactions in the 5th circuit while not allowing them elsewhere.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Is that under federal law? I also seem to recall something about how some states allowed purchases in neighboring states. I'm thinking it was out west, so someone in Texas could go to New Mexico, buy a gun, and bring it back.

But, again, just because state law might allow something, doesn't mean federal law does, too.

Federal and state. Federal used to allow between neighboring states if the states had a law allowing it. Now it is allowed in neighboring states, if the states don't have a law against it. It changed a couple years ago. IN used to have a law that allowed it between neighboring states, it has since been repealed.