Tyler v. Hillsdale County Sheriff’s Department
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
775 F.3d 308 (2014)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Clifford Tyler (plaintiff) was committed to a mental institution for one month after an emotionally traumatic divorce. Approximately 30 years later, Tyler attempted to purchase a firearm. Tyler’s purchase was denied because a federal law prohibited a person from possessing a firearm if the person had ever been (1) adjudicated as a mental defective or (2) committed to a mental institution. The law’s purpose was to prevent mentally ill people from committing suicide or acts of violence toward others. The law specifically allowed a person to regain the right to possess a firearm by obtaining an official ruling that the person was not dangerous. However, the federal program for restoring firearm-possession rights was not operative because it was not funded. Although Congress had provided incentives for states to implement rights-restoration programs, only some states had created these programs. Tyler lived in Michigan, which did not have a program for restoring firearm-possession rights. Therefore, although Tyler had evidence indicating that he was not dangerous and had not been mentally ill for decades, he had no access to either a federal or a state program that could restore his firearm-possession rights. Tyler sued, alleging that the federal law violated his Second Amendment rights. The district court dismissed Tyler’s suit for failure to state a claim, and Tyler appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Boggs, J.)
Concurrence (Gibbons, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.