D.C. Court of Appeals rules city’s gun magazine ban unconstitutional

The D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that banning firearm magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition is unconstitutional, violating the Second Amendment.

In the case, United States and the District of Columbia v. Tyree Benson, Mr. Benson said he was unconstitutionally convicted for possessing a gun that had a magazine that could hold more than 10 rounds.

The appeals court’s ruling stated that “magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition are ubiquitous in our country, numbering in the hundreds of millions, accounting for about half of the magazines in the hands of our citizenry, and they come standard with the most popular firearms sold in America today.”

Judge Joshua Deahl, who wrote on behalf of the two-judge majority on the three-judge panel, stated, “This appeal presents a Second Amendment challenge to the District’s ban on firearm magazines capable of holding ‘more than 10 rounds of ammunition.’

“The United States, which prosecuted Benson in the underlying case and defended the ban’s constitutionality in the initial round of appellate briefing, now concedes that this ban violates the Second Amendment. The District of Columbia, which is also a party to this appeal, continues to defend the constitutionality of its ban.”

The court also reversed Mr. Benson’s conviction for violating the magazine capacity ban in the District.

The court ruled that Mr. Benson could not have registered or procured a license to carry or lawfully possess ammunition for his firearm, given that it was equipped with a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

So the court also reversed convictions against Mr. Benson for possessing an unregistered firearm, carrying a pistol without a license and unlawful possession of ammunition.

The case could face more hurdles, such as an appeal by the District, seeking an en banc review. Pro-Second Amendment advocates hailed the ruling, though.

Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Chairman Alan Gottlieb sees the ruling as a major step forward, simply because of the influence it might have. 

“This is a major Second Amendment ruling,” Mr. Gottlieb said. “You could say that it is the ‘second Shot Heard Around the World.’

“The significance of the federal government’s flip [on the case] cannot be understated,” Mr. Gottlieb said.

“While the District continues to defend the ban, the fact that the Trump administration now recognizes the Second Amendment protects magazines amounts to a legal tectonic shift.”