SAF Victory In Prohibited Person Case

[center442]

2nd Amendment Foundation encourages distribution of the following...no copyright issues.

Fed. Court Ruling Opens Door To Gun Rights Restoration For Certain Misdemeanors


BELLEVUE, WA — The Second Amendment Foundation has quietly won a significant federal court victory in a Pennsylvania case in which the judge has ruled that a man convicted of a serious misdemeanor crime several years ago, but who has demonstrated that he “would present no more threat to the community” than an average law-abiding citizen, may not lose his Second Amendment rights under a federal gun control statute known as 922(g)(1).

The ruling, by Judge James Knoll Gardner for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, says that application of that statute to the plaintiff, Daniel Binderup, “violates the Second Amendment.”

“This case could provide a building block upon which similar cases in which people are convicted of non-violent misdemeanors might be challenged because they have lost their right to keep and bear arms as a result,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “Under existing federal law, many people convicted of state-level misdemeanors have lost their Second Amendment rights, essentially because they’ve been lumped together with convicted felons.

“One should not lose his or her constitutional rights for certain non-violent indiscretions that occur once in a lifetime,” he added.

Following his guilty plea in 1998, Binderup lost his Second Amendment rights and disposed of all of his firearms legally. In November 2013, he filed a complaint against Attorney General Eric Holder and B. Todd Jones, director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. SAF provided legal support through attorneys Alan Gura and Douglas T. Gould.

 

[Chevy 2 65]

 

[The5thDentist]

Good.

 

[Garys]

Do you have a link to any more details? The particulars of the case would be helpful in trying to figure out how applicable this might be to other cases. Of course a case decided in the Eastern District of PA is binding only within the Eastern District of PA. If it goes to the Circuit Court, it would be precedent in the Third Circuit and persuasive in the other Circuits.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

You can read the entire 86 page decision here.

This is a very good decision and has implications for Massachusetts.

Gura's commentary on it is here.

 

[Garys]

Thanks. I will read it being the geek you know me to be.

You can read the entire 86 page decision here.

This is a very good decision and has implications for Massachusetts.

Gura's commentary on it is here.

 

[Garys]

That is a very interesting decision. Fortunately, the case had a very good plaintiff, which eliminates a lot of the complications in the cases cited by the Judge in his opinion.

 

[center442]

You can read the entire 86 page decision here.

This is a very good decision and has implications for Massachusetts.

Gura's commentary on it is here.

Thanks for posting those links. I should have done so, but was in a hurry to get out the door.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

Thanks for posting those links. I should have done so, but was in a hurry to get out the door.

No Problem. It's fresh in my mind since I was reading it on the plane yesterday.

 

[noxin]

I can't believe this. Amazing. Hopefully, this will lead to widespread changes.

 

[tuna]

Awesome - of course, I still believe that no crime should strip a man (or woman) of the 2A. If they truly ARE a danger to society - than what the heck are they doing on the streets?

And if parole boards would have to consider that Gary Gangster will be on the loose, and legally able to carry a firearm, then they may think twice before letting animals out of cages.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

This case deserves a bump since it's up for a possible grant of certiorari. We'll know more (hopefully) after the justices' May 11 conference.

Binderup has been mentioned in several other threads, mostly because a divided Third Circuit, sitting en banc, upheld the lower court's decision to grant Binderup relief. Opinion.

There are actually two Binderup certiorori petitions before the court - the primary appeal by the government: Sessions v. Binderup and one filed by Binderup (Binderup v. Sessions) which seeks clarification of the “punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less” means “ language in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)(B).

 

[rwl1955]

NICE!

 

[oldguy68]

Dear MR. Daniel Binderup,
Thank you for standing up for your rights and the rights of others.
Also to The Second Amendment Foundation for supporting Mr. Binderup in his time of need!

Our founding fathers would be so proud of both of you!

 

[Rob Boudrie]

This is a PA misdafelony case. Very direct MA implications. Now, anyone know a misdafelon who would make a symoathetic plaintiff, and has not handled a gun since the misdafelony conviction? The later is important, since a misdafelon PP who kept using his LTC and only discovered PP status on a NICS check would be exposed to prosecution as a PP. That person would either be in a word of hurt, or simply be "negotiated" into dropping the case and ceasing attempts to get his rights back.

 

[DispositionMatrix]

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ation-for-certain-misdemeanors-277277751.html [FONT=&quot]26 Sep, 2014[/FONT]

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...ation-for-certain-misdemeanors-277277751.html [FONT="]26 Sep, 2014[/FONT]

Same case and the original decision from the OP. It's gone through two levels of appeals since then.

 

[otasan]

Great news!

 

[DispositionMatrix]

Same case and the original decision from the OP. It's gone through two levels of appeals since then.

I was providing the link left out of the OP and the date for context. I have been following the case.