AG Schimel Signs on to 2nd Amendment Case
AG Schimel signs on to 2nd Amendment case
Attorney General Brad Schimel has signed onto a brief submitted by the state of Nebraska urging the U.S. Supreme Court to accept a case regarding whether a locked storage requirement for handguns violates the people’s right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.
AG Schimel’s statement on his first decision as Attorney General to join a multi-state action, is the following:
“This constitutional issue is significant – so much so that a bipartisan group of attorneys general from 26 states has joined together to request that the Supreme Court of the United States reaffirm this right which is contained in our Bill of Rights,” Schimel said. “We must act, because if the decision by the federal Court of Appeals is not reversed, the precedent it sets could influence policy decisions and court holdings affecting the Constitutional rights of citizens within their homes, not just in the City of San Francisco, buy anywhere in America, including Wisconsin.”
Jackson v. City of San Francisco (No. 10-704)
Amicus Brief in Support of Petition to U.S. Supreme Court in Second Amendment Case
Whether the City of San Francisco's locked storage requirement for handguns violates the right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.
The city of San Francisco adopted an ordinance requiring citizens to keep handguns in their homes locked unless they are carrying them on their person. The law was challenged as a violation of the Second Amendment of U.S. Constitution. Specifically, citizens challenging the law argue that the San Francisco ordinance is similar to the trigger-lock requirement ordinance adopted by Washington, D.C., which was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).
Arguments presented in amicus brief submitted by states
Wisconsin, along with 25 other states, joined an amicus curiae brief submitted by the state of Nebraska urging the U.S. Supreme Court to accept the case and strike down the San Francisco ordinance. The states make the following arguments in their brief:
- The states have an interest in protecting the fundamental constitutional rights of their citizens. If the decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is not reversed, it will set a precedent which could influence policy decisions and court holdings beyond the city of San Francisco and beyond the Ninth Circuit.
- The ordinance violates the right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment and runs counter to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Heller.
- The Second Amendment protects an individual's right to weapons possessed by law-abiding, responsible citizens for lawful purposes, particularly in their own home.
- The U.S. Supreme Court in Heller explicitly stated that citizens must be permitted "to use [handguns] for the core lawful purpose of self-defense." McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742, 768 (2010), quoting Heller, 554 U.S. at 630.