Heller v. District of Columbia (Heller III)

In District of Columbia v. Heller (Heller I), 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the United States Supreme Court held that a District of Columbia (defendant) law prohibiting the holding and use of handguns for self-defense in the home was unconstitutional. The district’s city council then revised its gun laws by enacting a regulatory scheme with several new registration requirements. The regulatory scheme was again challenged by Dick Anthony Heller (plaintiff). The district defended the requirements on the ground that they helped (1) protect police officers and (2) promote public safety. The federal district court granted summary judgment in favor of the district, and Heller appealed. In Heller v. District of Columbia (Heller II), 670 F.3d 1254 (D.C. Cir. 2011), the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the basic registration requirements as they applied to handguns because of longstanding historical precedents. However, the court withheld a decision on the requirements’ constitutionality as applied to long guns. The case was remanded to the district court, which granted summary judgment in favor of the district and upheld the constitutionality of several requirements. These included requirements (1) involving registration of long guns, (2) that each firearm registrant appear in person to be fingerprinted and photographed, (3) that each registrant bring his firearm, (4) that registration be renewed every three years, (5) imposing certain fees for registration, (6) that each registrant complete a safety-and-training course, and (7) that only one pistol per person could be registered within a 30-day period. Heller again appealed.