States’ Rights
A federal appeals court in Denver has ruled against Wyoming in a lawsuit over a state law that seeks to allow people convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence to regain their gun rights.
A three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled that the procedure spelled out in Wyoming law fails to expunge the criminal record of people convicted of domestic violence.
The ruling is a victory for the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The agency had informed Wyoming that if it persisted in using the state law, the federal government would no longer accept Wyoming concealed weapons permits as a substitute for instant background checks for gun purchases.
Wyoming Attorney General Bruce Salzburg said Wednesday that he’s unlikely to suggest that the state ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.
“We now have two federal courts that have rejected Wyoming’s position,” Salzburg said, adding that the Supreme Court reviews only a small number of cases.
August 29th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Wyoming can proceed in ways that do not (necessarily) involve the courts. Lobby Congress to amend the Lautenberg amendment; set up a “pardon board” type procedure which totally expunges the conviction/protective order; set a period, say five years, upon the expiration of which a DV conviction/PO is automatically expunged if the defendant has kept his nose clean.
I don’t know what the governor’s pardon power is in Wyoming but if it’s like Illinois’s he could #2 above on his own without even involving the Wyoming legislature.
August 29th, 2008 at 11:13 am
I guess I’m just dumb, and don’t understand. The BATFE accepts “Wyoming concealed weapons permits as a substitute for instant background checks for gun purchases”?
Here in Minnesnowta, we have some laws which require EITHER a “permit to purchase” or a CCW permit, in order to purchase a handgun/pistol (it’s not required for long guns like rifles and shotguns).
But using either of these does NOT obviate the need for the NICS call-up and check.
Do the Feds treat a Wyoming CCW permit as better than MN’s?
August 29th, 2008 at 11:40 am
Any lawyerly types know an answer to Blackwing1’s question?
I was baffled by that as well. I’m in NH and as far as I know there is no specification in the local laws that require the NICs beyond obeyance of federal law.
So, how can the federal gov bypass the NICS based on a local state document?
August 29th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
I disagree with Uncle’s description. Federal law defines NICS and how you are exempt from it. Federal law also determines what exunged means for the interpretation of the federal law. What Wyoming did the judges decided did not fall into that definition and so Wyoming was told they were not exempt if they kept doing it. Like NK said at the top, Wyoming can do several things to comply with the federal definition of expunge if they want to keep their permits NICS exempt.
To answer the last 2 posts…
Federal law says that if you have a state issued permit that expires at a maximum of every 5 years and when applying or renewing a NICS check is ran and passed then you are exempt from having to go through a NICS check at purchase (still have to fill the form out though). Here is the list of states and qualifiying permits/licenses: http://www.atf.gov/firearms/bradylaw/permit_chart.htm
August 29th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
The problem here is that Wyoming is engaging in Newspeak. They call it “expunged”, but the record is kept and can be used in future legal/criminal proceedings. That’s not what I or the Feds think when we hear the word “expunged”.
August 29th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
i actually side with the ATF on this one… if the expungment is only partial, then it isnt an expungment…
that has nothing to do with my disagreeing that a misdemeanor should prohibit someone from owning.