Another Federal Court Victory

[Clarence]

A federal judge has struck down a Corp of Engineers policy banning firearms (except Hunting) on property it controls on Second Amendment grounds.  

It's Morris v. US Army Corps of Engineers, D. Idaho, Jan. 10, 2014.
The Corps promulgated a regulation generally forbidding possession of a firearm and other arms (with exceptions for hunting and use at authorized ranges) on land it controls, including 700 dams and associated recreation areas. The court strikes down the regulation on 2A grounds. The court reasons that the regulation affects the core Heller right of self-defense, and that possession in a tent is as protected as possession in a home, the regulation entirely forbids that, and therefore is subject to strict scrutiny.
It reasons that possession for self-defense outside the tent is also protected. It reasons that a complete ban on that is a serious infringement, but it is not necessary to pick a standard of review since this would fail even intermediate review. It grants a preliminary injunction since plaintiffs have proven a "strong likelihood" that they will win at trial.

[Cbmarine]

Shoowee!! According to Wikipedia "The C&D Canal is owned and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District." 

[Clarence]

Shoowee!! According to Wikipedia "The C&D Canal is owned and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District." 

Hey!   You are right.  Didn't think about that.  Good one. 

[MarkB]

Could this reasoning be applied to State Parks, Management Areas and Forests?

[Clarence]

Could this reasoning be applied to State Parks, Management Areas and Forests?

I'm not a Lawyer (IANAL) but as this opinion references Heller and as Heller was "incorporated" as applying to the states, it would look like it to me.   Remember that Heller and McDonald applied to flat out bans.  This was also true in the Madigan case overturning carry ban in Illinois and the recent gun shop case in Chicago

The Corp of Engineers had a flat out ban on firearms for self defense.  Looks to me like
Hunting and such could be regulated but self defense cannot.  

Again, IANAL

[groundgrid]

The NCC tax maps show that the property along each side of the canal is owned by "US Government"

Apparently the lands are "managed by the Delaware Division of Fish & Wildlife"

So which rule takes priority?
1). Court ruling allowing firearms on Corps of Engineers land
2). Rules put in place by the land manager (State of Delaware)

Anybody out there a lawyer?

[Cbmarine]

The NCC tax maps show that the property along each side of the canal is owned by "US Government"

Apparently the lands are "managed by the Delaware Division of Fish & Wildlife"

So which rule takes priority?
1). Court ruling allowing firearms on Corps of Engineers land
2). Rules put in place by the land manager (State of Delaware)

My best guess is the State rules (not laws) will also have to be modified. There may be some wiggle room in the "authorized in writing".
C&D Canal is surrounded by the C&D Wildlife Area which is managed by DNREC Division of Fish and Wildlife
Overview map http://www.dnrec.delaware.gov/fw/Hunting/Documents/WMA%20Maps%202013/STATE%20OVERVIEW.pdf
The Standard Wildfire Area Hunting Regulations in Section 1 state "no firearms" between March 1 and August 31 except during hunting seasons or "as authorized in writing by Div of Fish and Wildlife".  
http://www.dnrec.delaware.gov/fw/Hunting/Documents/WMA%20Maps%202013/gen%20regs%202013-14.pdf

But here's a kicker that may also apply:
DE State Parks Rules 24.3 http://www.destateparks.com/rules/
It shall be unlawful to display, possess or discharge firearms of any description, air rifles, B.B. guns, sling shots or archery equipment upon any lands or waters administered by the Division, except by those persons lawfully hunting in those areas specifically designated for hunting by the Division, or except with prior written approval of the Director.

[Clarence]

How does this work when people are camping in state parks.  Certainly it would be legal to have firearms for self defense in a tent, camper or motor home

The Delaware state Constitution would apply here even without this ruling based on the 2nd amendment
Has this ever been challenged in Delaware?

[groundgrid]

Has anyone ever asked the director of the division to issue a blanket exception for CDW permit holders?

If not, who might be influential enough to get this done?

The exemption would only need to cover possession.

Contact info for the director:

David Saveikis
Director
302-739-9910
David.Saveikis@state.de.us

[Cbmarine]

Has anyone ever asked the director of the division to issue a blanket exception for CDW permit holders?

If not, who might be influential enough to get this done?

The exemption would only need to cover possession.

Contact info for the director:

David Saveikis
Director
302-739-9910
David.Saveikis@state.de.us

There is an active thread on http://deloc.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=8674&hilit=Rules+firearms+state+parks&start=0
The previous director said no but they are trying again.

[groundgrid]

They did not appear to get anywhere.

IMO a letter from an attorney and/or a request for a full explanation from a state senator would be appropriate.

The attorney's letter would be very appropriate right now given the decision concerning Corp of Engineers properties.

I would consider pitching in a few dollars toward paying a lawyer to look into this. Might cost $600-$800, split between 20-30 people or with support of a local gun club It would be doable. Might even find a guy that is sympathetic to the cause.

[Adrenolin]

I'd pitch in a few buck also if someone got the ball rolling.

I actually wrote a letter to send to the new Director but might hold off if this were to get start.

[Cbmarine]

They did not appear to get anywhere.

IMO a letter from an attorney and/or a request for a full explanation from a state senator would be appropriate.

The attorney's letter would be very appropriate right now given the decision concerning Corp of Engineers properties.

I would consider pitching in a few dollars toward paying a lawyer to look into this. Might cost $600-$800, split between 20-30 people or with support of a local gun club It would be doable. Might even find a guy that is sympathetic to the cause.

DSSA has an attorney whose first name is Anthony.  Don't know how contact him. Should be right outfit and right guy.

[Clarence]

http://ia800902.us.archive.org/4/items/gov.uscourts.idd.32180/gov.uscourts.idd.32180.42.0.pdf

This is link to the actual decision

[groundgrid]

The following e-mail has been sent to the office of Francis Pileggi.
He is the attorney who is handling the Doe vs. Wilmington Housing Authority case.

Dear Mr. Pileggi,

As you may know, the US District Court in Idaho last week issued a preliminary injunction against the US Army Corps of Engineers ordering the
Corps not to enforce a ban on the carrying of firearms for self defense while in Corps administered recreational areas.

The Delaware Division of Fish & Wildlife (DFW) imposes a similar ban, in fact, the Delaware ban uses language that substantially matches that used by the Corps of Engineers:

"24.3 It shall be unlawful to display, possess or discharge firearms of any description, air rifles, B.B. guns, sling shots or archery equipment upon any lands or waters administered by the Division, except by those persons lawfully hunting in those areas specifically designated for hunting by the Division, or those with prior written approval of the Director."

In the past, numerous gun owners have tried in vain to approach the DFW & ask for a relaxing of the regulation so that citizens with Delaware CDW permits can carry their guns, as they typically do, while in DFW managed areas. All that would be necessary is a blanket written exemption from the director of the Division.

On behalf of myself & several other gun owners, we would like to investigate the cost of having you draft a formal request to the Director of DFW.
If you can help us, please let me know the approximate cost so that we can raise the necessary funds.

Thank you very much for considering this. I have attached a copy of the Idaho decision in the event that you have not already read it.