Two Recent Civil Rights Victories and Implications for South Carolina

Last Thursday, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia struck down what was essentially a blanket ban on carrying a handgun in DC. [Opinion here]

Basically, DC let you have a handgun in your home for self-defense, but DC had a longstanding ban on possession of a handgun outside of your home. The relevant part of the opinion is here:

In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional.

Frankly, I'm not sure if this means you can openly carry in DC or not. The ruling doesn't say what an individual can do - it only says that the District cannot enforce it's existing laws until the District sets up a Constitutional licensing system. I think to be safe, you would probably not want to carry openly. To me, that's just asking for unnecessary heat.

Also, note: this opinion doesn't touch the specific bans on carrying into specific places like the Capitol grounds, government buildings, etc. Those prohibitions are still legal.  Finally, this ruling prohibits the District from applying the law to non-residents based solely on the fact that they are non-residents. Once a licensing system is set up, I think this will change.

In an update, the District is asking for a stay of this ruling while they either appeal to the next level and/or work to put together a licencing system.

ALSO...IN OTHER CIVIL RIGHTS VICTORIES

Yesterday, a three judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld (2-1) the trial court's decision to strike down Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage. [Opinion here]

This is important because the 4th Circuit covers South Carolina. That means there is now established precedent in our federal circuit for invalidating state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage. I would be very surprised if Plaintiffs from South Carolina are not already in the process of bringing an action. Based on this ruling, I would be surprised if South Carolina's law survives.

To sum up, same-sex marriage advocates and gun-rights advocates both had good days in court, while governments seeking to abridge the rights of citizens had bad days in court.

More freedom is a good thing. As Instapundit says, "in my ideal world, happily married gay couples would have closets full of assault weapons."

With these two decisions, we're one or two steps closer to that now.