Social Networks We Use

Categories

CT Tech Junkie Feed

iPad Air 2 an Incremental Step Up from the Original
Oct 22, 2014 11:45 pm
It feels like iPads have been around forever, but it has only been about four years since the original iPad’s release....more »
Video Review | Fujitsu ScanSnap ix100 Mobile Document Scanner
Oct 12, 2014 3:35 pm
Fujitsu’s ScanSnap scanners are known for scanning large volumes of documents quickly while capturing both sides of a...more »

Our Partners

˜

Gun Rights Groups Appeal Thursday Court Decision

by Hugh McQuaid | Jan 31, 2014 5:25pm
(3) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Courts

A lawyer for a group of gun rights groups and firearm sellers has appealed a Thursday decision by a federal court judge upholding a new Connecticut gun control law as constitutional.

Attorney Brian Stapleton filed a notice of appeal Thursday, just a day after U.S. District Court Judge Alfred Covello concluded that Connecticut’s new ban on certain rifles and ammunition magazines was constitutional.

“The court concludes that the legislation is constitutional. While the act burdens the plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights, it is substantially related to the important governmental interest of public safety and crime control,” the decision reads.

Stapleton represents the Coalition of Connecticut Sportsmen, Connecticut Citizens Defense League, gun store owners, and individual citizens in their challenge of the gun control law. He appealed the case to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Tags: , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |

(3) Comments

posted by: cnj-david | January 31, 2014  5:40pm

In response to the judge’s decision I sent a 50$ check today to CCDL and a 25$ check to 2nd Amendment Foundation.

posted by: BHirsh | February 1, 2014  3:01pm

Wrong standard of review, judge.

Strict scrutiny is required, and “substantially related” doesn’t overcome that burden.

Strict scrutiny requires that the “compelling public safety interest” can only overcome constitutional protections if the law under consideration brings evidential proof that it will actually achieve that purpose, and that it will use the least intrusive means possible to that end.

Connecticut’s law fails both of the latter.

This ruling will ultimately be vacated and remanded.

posted by: Chien DeBerger | February 2, 2014  5:56pm

Sending my magnanimous tax refund check from Danny to the CCDL litigation fund!