Ninth Circuit Nominee's Powerful Second Amendment Expertise

In the intricate landscape of legal battles surrounding the Second Amendment, the background and understanding of judges play a pivotal role. The Ninth Circuit, in particular, has seen its share of cases that test the very fabric of gun rights. Recently, the spotlight has fallen on judicial nominees who possess not just legal acumen, but also firsthand experience with the rights they are tasked with interpreting. This is crucial, as demonstrated by the dissenting opinion of Ninth Circuit Judge Lawrence Van Dyke, who highlighted a stark lack of firearm familiarity among his colleagues when ruling on California's ban on "large capacity" magazines. His experience underscores the pressing need for judges who understand the practical realities of firearms and the Second Amendment.

Understanding the Second Amendment: Why Expertise Matters on the Bench

Judges are not required to be experts in every subject that comes before them. However, for issues as nuanced and constitutionally significant as the Second Amendment, a working knowledge of firearms and their function can be profoundly important. Judge Van Dyke's blistering dissent in a case concerning California's ban on "large capacity" magazines serves as a prime example. He argued that the majority opinion lacked a "basic familiarity with firearms," leading to a ruling that, in his view, fundamentally misunderstood the impact of such bans on the ability of citizens to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes.

Van Dyke's Dissent: A Masterclass in Firearms Understanding

The Los Angeles Times reported on Van Dyke's compelling video dissent, where he took an unprecedented step to educate his fellow judges. He explained how he had rendered inoperable the firearms he intended to use in his demonstration, clarifying that his aim was not to introduce new evidence but to provide a "rudimentary understanding" of why the majority's analysis was flawed. Van Dyke stated, "I'm sure I could explain all of this in writing without being accused of improper fact-finding, but it’s obviously much more effective to simply show you." He then proceeded to handle several handguns, detailing features like magazines, sights, and grips, and demonstrating how reassembly could, if misused, make a firearm "more dangerous." His central argument was that if a large-capacity magazine could be considered a mere accessory, then "the exact same argument would apply to essentially every part on this firearm, which would mean that essentially nothing on this firearm would be protected by the 2nd Amendment."

Having a judge who not>

Judicial Nominees and Their Connection to Firearms

The confirmation process for federal judges often involves scrutiny of their backgrounds, affiliations, and potential biases. For nominees to the Ninth Circuit, particularly those whose careers may intersect with Second Amendment litigation, their relationship with firearms and gun rights organizations can become a focal point. This was evident during the nomination of Judge Lawrence Van Dyke, who was questioned about his membership in the NRA. He addressed these concerns by pledging to resign from the organization if confirmed and to "set aside any advocacy positions and policy views and faithfully apply the relevant precedent" in his judicial duties.

Eric Chunyee Tung: A Nominee with Shooting Sports Experience

The recent nomination of Eric Chunyee Tung to the Ninth Circuit brings another individual with a notable connection to firearms into the judicial arena. Tung, a partner at Jones Day, boasts an impressive legal background, including clerkships for Justices Antonin Scalia and Neil Gorsuch. However, his membership in the International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) is particularly relevant. This affiliation suggests not>