• • 
    

Ruling Reveals How Sweeping A SCOTUS Ruling Establishing Strict Scrutiny For The 2nd Amendment Could Be

(2021-02-04) Note: Thanks to Steve Lehto for covering this on his YouTube channel.

In a case involving fees for commercial filming in areas under the control of the National Park Service, the DC District Court has ruled that fees charged for exercising constitutional rights of the first order are unconstitutional.  What follows is one of many quotes establishing this.

‘This regime is difficult to square with the longstanding rule that the government may not "impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution," including the First Amendment right to free expression.’

In the ruling, the district court cited a 1943 SCOTUS decision that established that even some commercial speech – generally subject to more regulation that other forms of speech – cannot be subjected to fees.

How does this relate to gun rights and the 2nd Amendment?  Well, free speech, protected by the 1st Amendment, is accorded the protection of strict scrutiny.  Logically, if the 2nd Amendment is likewise accorded the same level of protection, fees related to the exercise of that right would be highly suspect.  This would be even more true of fees imposed upon non-commercial use/purchase/ownership of weapons.

At a minimum, the excessive fees aimed at discouraging the exercise of the 2A right would be unconstitutional.  There are plces in America where governments charge yearly fees of hundreds of dollars per gun.  Those would be gone.   My guess is that IF CCW permits are upheld, fees would be limited to government’s actual cost – if fees are permitted at all.

The 2nd Amendment being accorded strict scrutiny in the anti-gun rights side’s worst fear.  Let’s hope, work and contribute to make that fear a reality.