How the Full 9th Circuit Will Turn This Miracle Into a Mirage

Published on May 15, 2024
Duration: 12:04

This video discusses the Ninth Circuit's en banc review of the United States v. Duarte case, which previously struck down 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) as unconstitutional as applied to a felon. The Department of Justice is appealing this decision, arguing that felons are not protected by the Second Amendment and that prior case law like United States v. Vong remains valid post-Bruen. The potential for a circuit split is highlighted as a factor increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review.

Quick Summary

The Ninth Circuit is conducting an en banc review of United States v. Duarte, a case where a panel previously found the federal law prohibiting felons from possessing firearms (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) unconstitutional. The DOJ is appealing, arguing felons are outside Second Amendment protections and that prior case law remains valid post-Bruen.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction: Ninth Circuit Ruling on Federal Gun Law
  2. 00:55Sponsor Segment: Paint Cam Smart Home Security
  3. 02:52Case Overview: United States v. Duarte
  4. 03:40DOJ Appeal to Full Ninth Circuit
  5. 04:39Issues Presented by the Government
  6. 05:30Revisiting United States v. Vong
  7. 07:03DOJ's Merits Argument: Second Amendment & Felons
  8. 08:30DOJ's Concern Over Non-Violent Felonies
  9. 09:41Argument for Circuit Split
  10. 10:15Comparison to Range v. Attorney General
  11. 10:49DOJ's Motion for En Banc Review
  12. 11:08Conclusion: Washington Gun Law Prediction

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the significance of the United States v. Duarte case for federal gun laws?

The United States v. Duarte case saw a Ninth Circuit panel rule that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), prohibiting felons from possessing firearms, was unconstitutional as applied to the defendant. This ruling is now under en banc review by the full Ninth Circuit.

Why is the Department of Justice appealing the Duarte ruling to the full Ninth Circuit?

The DOJ is appealing to prevent the prior ruling from standing, arguing that felons are not protected by the Second Amendment and that existing case law like United States v. Vong remains valid. They also aim to avoid a broad interpretation of the Bruen standard that could invalidate numerous federal laws.

What is the DOJ's argument regarding felons and the Second Amendment?

The DOJ contends that felons have forfeited their membership in the political community and are therefore not included in 'the people' protected by the Second Amendment. They cite historical precedents of states denying felons rights like voting and jury service.

How does the DOJ view the Bruen decision in relation to felon-in-possession laws?

The DOJ argues that Bruen did not abrogate prior rulings upholding prohibitions on firearm possession by felons. They believe that distinguishing between violent and non-violent felonies is an unworkable standard and that prior circuit precedent remains binding.

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Washington Gun Law

View all →