Common Sense: "Punishment for Possessing Guns at Home While Dealing Drugs from Home:" At Volokh Conspiracy, Eugene Volokh has a post on the Seventh Circuit's decision in United States v. Jackson. The decision addresses Jackson's argument that District of Columbia v. Heller compelled the lower court to withdraw his guilty plea for a weapons charge because Heller held that the Constitution's second amendment entitled people to have guns in their homes for self-protection. In the opinion, Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote: "The Court said in Heller that the Constitution entitles citizens to keep and bear arms for the purpose of lawful
self-protection, not for all self-protection. Jackson was distributing
illegal drugs (cocaine and unlicensed dextromethorphan hydrobromide
tablets) out of his home. The Constitution does not give anyone the
right to be armed while committing a felony, or even to have guns in
the next room for emergency use should suppliers, customers, or the
police threaten a dealer's stash." Volokh agrees with this reasoning, and also analyze's some of Judge Easterbook's other points. He also points to his upcoming article in the UCLA Law Review on Implementing the Right To Keep and Bear Arms.
Separation of Powers Argument Prevents Release of Uighurs: Lyle Denniston has a post on today's D.C. Circuit Court ruling that a federal judge had no authority to order the release into the U.S. of 17 Chinese Muslim Uighurs being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Denniston reports that the court confined its holding to whether a federal judge may order release into the U.S. of non-citizens being held outside U.S. territory. The majority concluded that a federal judge could not, only the President and Congress have authority to decide when aliens may enter the U.S. The sole dissent from this holding came from Circuit Judge Judith W. Rogers. Judge Rogers voted to overturn the federal judge's release order, but disagreed with the majority's reasoning. She found the majority's analysis to be unfaithful to the holding of Boumediene v. Bush because it would compromise habeas corpus' ability to act "as a check on arbitrary detention and the balance of powers over exclusion and admission and release of aliens into the United States recognized by the Supreme Court to reside in the Congress, the Executive and the habeas court." Denniston's post speculates that today's Circuit Court ruling could pose a challenge for the Obama Administration. While the ruling would have been perceived as a victory for the Bush Administration, it is unclear whether it will survive under the new administration. Jordan Weismann also has a post on the D.C. Circuit Court's ruling at Blog of the Legal Times.
Separation of Powers Argument Prevents Release of Uighurs: Lyle Denniston has a post on today's D.C. Circuit Court ruling that a federal judge had no authority to order the release into the U.S. of 17 Chinese Muslim Uighurs being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Denniston reports that the court confined its holding to whether a federal judge may order release into the U.S. of non-citizens being held outside U.S. territory. The majority concluded that a federal judge could not, only the President and Congress have authority to decide when aliens may enter the U.S. The sole dissent from this holding came from Circuit Judge Judith W. Rogers. Judge Rogers voted to overturn the federal judge's release order, but disagreed with the majority's reasoning. She found the majority's analysis to be unfaithful to the holding of Boumediene v. Bush because it would compromise habeas corpus' ability to act "as a check on arbitrary detention and the balance of powers over exclusion and admission and release of aliens into the United States recognized by the Supreme Court to reside in the Congress, the Executive and the habeas court." Denniston's post speculates that today's Circuit Court ruling could pose a challenge for the Obama Administration. While the ruling would have been perceived as a victory for the Bush Administration, it is unclear whether it will survive under the new administration. Jordan Weismann also has a post on the D.C. Circuit Court's ruling at Blog of the Legal Times.
Leave a comment