State court again strikes down Philly gun laws
Legal News Center
A state appeals court ruled Wednesday that the city cannot enforce an assault weapons ban and a law prohibiting guns bought by one person and given to another, measures passed by City Council in an effort to combat persistent gun violence.
The 6-1 ruling marked the latest setback for Philadelphia officials, who have fought for years for the right to pass their own gun legislation. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has previously upheld the state's exclusive right to enact gun laws.
The National Rifle Association challenged a series of measures that were passed by City Council in April 2008 and signed by Mayor Michael Nutter. Both sides expect the case to end up before the state's highest court again.
"The bottom line is, we won," NRA attorney C. Scott Shields said of the ruling.
In Thursday's ruling, the court said the city could not ban assault weapons or pass the law prohibiting straw purchases, in which one person fills out forms and buys a gun for someone else — often convicted felons who can't legally own guns.
In a dissenting opinion, Commonwealth Judge Doris A. Smith-Ribner asserted the city does have the right to pass its own gun laws, citing the hundreds of residents killed by gun violence every year.
The NRA has also asked the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down strict gun control laws in the Chicago area. The NRA wants the court to rule that last year's decision invalidating a handgun ban in the District of Columbia also applies to local and state laws. The justices likely won't decide before late September whether to hear the NRA's case.
Related listings
-
Appeals court blocks release of detainee pictures
Legal News Center 06/12/2009The U.S. government can keep pictures of detainee abuse secret while it asks the Supreme Court to permanently block release of the photographs on the grounds they could incite violence in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, a federal appeals court said T...
-
Court rejects challenge to 'don't ask, don't tell'
Legal News Center 06/09/2009The Supreme Court refused on Monday to hear a legal challenge to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, a decision that allows the Obama administration to continue its slow, back-burner response to liberal activists who want gays to serve ope...
-
Court steers clear of Ariz. ski resort dispute
Legal News Center 06/08/2009The Supreme Court on Monday turned down an appeal from Indian tribes that wanted to block expansion of a ski resort on a mountain they consider sacred. The justices said they will not get involved in the dispute between a half-dozen Western tribes an...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.