BREAKING: Another Federal Circuit Court Unravels Second Amendment Gun Rights

Supreme Court and Guns
Supreme Court and Guns
Firearms Policy Coalition
Firearms Policy Coalition

Denver, CO -(AmmoLand.com)- In yet another decision that thumbs it’s nose at the Supreme Court’s landmark D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago rulings, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held today that the Second Amendment does not protect gun rights outside of one’s home.

The case, Bonidy v. United States Postal Service, challenged 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(l), which prohibits the storage and carriage of firearms on USPS property. The district court decision found that the law was unconstitutional as applied to its prohibition on guns in parking lots, but not the ban on carry inside government buildings.

Circuit Judge David M. Ebel–another Ronald Reagan appointee to decide against gun rights–was joined by Circuit Judge Gregory A. Phillips (appointed by Barack Obama) in the decision:

We….conclude that the regulation is constitutional as to all USPS property at issue in this case, including the Avon Post Office parking lot, because the Second Amendment right to bear arms has not been extended to “government buildings.” Government buildings, in this context, includes the government owned parking lot connected to the U.S. Post Office. Alternatively, even if we were to conclude that the parking lot did not qualify as a “government building,” we would uphold this regulation as constitutional as applied to the parking lot under independent intermediate scrutiny.

Ignoring McDonald’s command that the Second Amendment does not protect “second-class” rights, the Tenth Circuit held that “the risk inherent in firearms and other weapons distinguishes the Second Amendment right from other fundamental rights that have been held to be evaluated under a strict scrutiny test, such as the right to marry and the right to be free from viewpoint discrimination, which can be exercised without creating a direct risk to others.”

Help us FIGHT President Obama’s push for more gun control!

But the Supreme Court expressly rejected that argument in 2010 when it struck down the City of Chicago’s handgun ban. Justice Alito, writing for the majority, said:

The right to keep and bear arms, however, is not the only constitutional right that has controversial public safety implications. All of the constitutional provisions that impose restrictions on law enforcement and on the prosecution of crimes fall into the same category. See, e.g., Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586, 591, 126 S.Ct. 2159, 165 L.Ed.2d 56 (2006) (“The exclusionary rule generates `substantial social costs,’ United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 907, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984), which sometimes include setting the guilty free and the dangerous at large”); Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 522, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972)(reflecting on the serious consequences of dismissal for a speedy trial violation, which means “a defendant who may be guilty of a serious crime will go free”);Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 517, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966) (Harlan, J., dissenting); id., at 542, 86 S.Ct. 1602 (White, J., dissenting) (objecting that the Court’s rule “in some unknown number of cases . . . will return a killer, a rapist or other criminal to the streets . . . to repeat his crime”);Mapp, 367 U.S., at 659, 81 S.Ct. 1684.

According to the Tenth Circuit, however, “even assuming a right to bear firearms outside the home, and even if, contrary to our ruling above, the parking lot is not itself considered part of a ‘government building,’ we conclude that any such right Bonidy might possess was not violated here by 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(1) precluding him from possessing a firearm in the postal parking lot.”

Circuit Judge Timothy Tymkovich (appointed by George W. Bush) dissented in part, saying:

First, I would explicitly hold in this case that the Second Amendment applies outside the home instead of assuming but not deciding it does, as the majority concludes….Second, I would affirm the district court’s invalidation of the regulation as applied in the parking lot.

However, he also noted that “the list and the facts of this case ultimately lead me to concur in the judgment regarding the post office building.”

On June 8, 2015, the Supreme Court yet again denied review to a federal gun rights lawsuit where a lower court upheld a gun control law that appeared to directly conflict with the Heller decision. In an uncommon published dissent from the Court’s decision to not take up the case, Justice Clarence Thomas, who wrote a concurring opinion in McDonald, said:

“We warned in Heller that a constitutional guarantee subject to future judges’ assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional guarantee at all.”

Thomas was joined in his dissent by Justice Antonin Scalia, who authored Heller.

BOTTOM LINE: It appears that, until the nation’s highest court decides to protect the expressly enumerated Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms as strongly as it does non-enumerated rights like gay marriage and abortion, law-abiding American gun owners are simply left to watch lower courts unravel the Constitution and our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms in decisions like Bonidy. The full Bonidy v. USPS decision can be read here.

See also:

About Firearms Policy Coalition

Firearms Policy Coalition is a nonprofit civil rights advocacy organization that serves its members and the public through legal efforts, direct and grassroots lobbying, education, and technology. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the inalienable, fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms.

For more information, please visit www.FirearmsPolicy.org.

24 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ATT-Tactical

USPS Office of General Counsel Dear Sirs, Regarding the Bonidy v. United States Postal Service ruling, is this now absolute and does that mean I may no longer walk into my local Post Office and ship a handgun to an FFL Dealer or licensed Manufacturer anymore? I have been filing the required PS Form 1508 with the Post Master there, but has this method of shipment now been cut off to me and other licensed dealers?? AND, does this mean that my method of security for my package, (armed) also become void? If I am permitted to enter the Post… Read more »

Neil Liebman

Let us be more precise about all of this.These are acts of tyranny and a casual mutiny against our citizens of the once great United States Of America.Any person or persons,weather civilian or government are guilty of committing these acts against the US constitution.So why are government officials getting away with this,we ask ourselves.Why, because they are backed bu a semi socialist dictator President that thinks he is above the laws of our nation,the US Constitution.These acts, if committed by anyone other then corruption within the government would be punishable by death or life in prison,for opposing the Constitution of… Read more »

Ron

Dan. Hate to disagree with you but there is no such thing as separation of church and state. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The Church of England was what the King required.
Even though the government cannot control religion just watch what happens to the Christians in this country after the ruling on gay rights.

Ron

OLd shooter, if you read the entire Constitution, you will find that one provision requires the government to establish and maintain a post. The Post Office will never go broke. It has to be funded.

TSgt B

This would be the same constitution that PROHIBITS the “government” from infringing upon the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, right? Point made.

oldshooter

This kind of BS is why I have not been inside a US Post Office in more than 15 years, and won’t enter one again until they recognize my civil rights. It is perfectly feasible to do all your mail business using FedEx, UPS, etc. instead of the USPS. Let ’em go broke.

Jack

I bet Fedex and UPS don’t want guns either.

Dan

Up is down and down is up. Homosexual marriage, abortion and the separation of Church and State is expressly written into the Constitution, but the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not? I guess the English Language is inferred differently by our betters as they attained a degree in Law. Maybe there is small print on the bottom of the Constitution that I haven’t been able to see previously? Welcome to the beginnings of the new Soviet Socialist paradise. I guess the only thing it has going for it, is that as Comrade Lenin remarked, Liberals are useful idiots… Read more »

Richard Schurman

Here we go again. I advocate that any sitting judge that endeavors to re-interpret the Constitution should be immediately censured and removed from the bench since it is a clear violation of their oath of office.

I hope that SCOTUS will reprimand these sniveling, incompetent, brainless judges that exude their coprolite intelligence with such impunity of the Constitution.

Ed

Um, SCOTUS has become mentor for activist, azzhat “judges”. We are rapidly witnessing the revival of the reality of Liberty being an individual lifestyle choice, with the attendant individual responsibilities that were formerly universally understood and embraced by free Americans as part and parcel of life in our Republic. ‘Bout time…

Don Holmes

IF, the 2nd had any restrictions it would be in it. Shall not be infringed is pretty clear to me . Nobody on the face of the can change that, even an attempted amendment would be a infringement and not allowable. Self protection is a right from God ,Not from queer judges and guarantied by the 2nd amendment. I am a law abiding citizen and I will abide by the laws of God and the bill of rights and the guaranties of the U.S. Constitution.

Rich

Mental health is the avenue to gun control..
Eastern Europe prior to WWII disarmed the citizenry in this manner..

American Psychiatric Asso: Half of Americans are mentally ill..

300 million prescriptions for psychiatric drugs written in 2009 alone..
Maybe they will begin confiscation with single mothers on medication for depression or
better yet – parents of children with ADHD…….

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASKE FOR

Loyde

Need to examine the Psychiatric Org. to see how many of them are capable of making decisions for the rest of us. I say to them ” GO SUCK AN EGG!!!!!!”

ljdraves

Just think of the number of police officers that are on meds or SHOULD be on meds. Their job is one of the most stressful in the world. Just because you take psych meds doesn’t mean you are a psychopath. Yes. I am on meds. My psychiatrist and I often speak about my shooting hobby and training and how it is a form of meditation that calms the mind. Just think about it. I put the ear plugs in and the world fades away. Then I slow my breathing and my heart rate, focus on rear sight, front sight, target… Read more »

Ed

Um, just think of how many receiving .gov money are self medicating…few, if any of these clowns get drug tested. Given that many drugs are illegal (not that it’s Constitutional to say what anyone ingests), anyone getting we the people’s dough should be ensured to be in compliance with the rules. I’m sure this oversight will be corrected promptly, right?

Franko K.

It’s not the guns – need more help for the mental cases, the worst with more insane asylums and production of strait jackets. Search “Big list of drug-induced killers” Insert Obama or any other rotten “progressive” for “Himmler” below – or for Hitler or Stalin or for any other despot who banned guns: “Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or the SA – ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State.” — Heinrich Himmler Many others as above by dictators and human slaughterers as compared to: “The 2nd amendment is mainly… Read more »

Dick Hertz

Impeach the both Traitors

dick hertz

Impeach Ebel and Phillips

askeptic

Penumbral emanations are much more concrete than what a bunch of Dead, White Men in 1787 approved in writing.
Know you place, peasant.

Jeff R.

Here we have someone whose parents didn’t have the smarts to give their child a name like John, Joe, Bill, etc. You get the idea. So we have someone named Skeptic making a comment on here where he refers to something back in the 1700’s! And now I can put the name and the comment where they properly belong , in the trash. It was rude and ridiculous all at the same time. Talking about preambles and Dead White Men while having the audacity to call the writer a peasant and reminds him to know his place! Well, I’m going… Read more »

Jim Greaves

Hmmm? Even using the Left’s People Control rationale for what the Second Amendment “means”, one is struck by how absurd the 10th Circus judges are. How the hell is one supposed to participate in the “militia” part, if not outside? These dunces on the 10th must have been produced by idiots.

Jim

My question is, who owns the gov? I though it was u.s citizens, hmmm? Two same sex people can marry and have equal rights? But the 2nd amendment is less important? I think there should be a 2 week grace period for the registration of new nfa rifles, to the registry. And imo, we should have access to gov surplus ammo, at cheap prices. First rate ammo. We also better ban the American flag too, it hurts people’s feelings, I need a tissue…so sad just looking at it..it’s racist and anti gay, anti japenese, anti everything. God has changed pro… Read more »

Dr Dave

Jim the problem is as you just wrote. Who owns the Government? The answer as you suggested is the American people. Then the question is who are the American people? If they are the voting majority then guess what the 2nd Am is GONE. A Majority of the American voting population have voted for a POTUS who openly has stated he will spend his term removing rights and increasing control on gun ownership. So based on your comment “we the people” are actually speaking. They are saying they want to modify the 2nd AM. The rest of us who represent… Read more »

Ed

“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.” Benjamin Franklin.
Keep your powder dry, folks…