The Sixth Circuit has granted en banc review in Tyler v. Hillsdale County Sheriff's Department, a Second Amendment case in which the Court's original panel reversed a district court's Rule 12 dismissal.
Tyler raised a Second Amendment challenge to the prohibition in 18 USC 922(g)(4) barring a person once committed to a mental institution from possessing a firearm. Tyler was once involuntarily committed to a mental institution by his daughter when he experienced a very emotional and extended reaction to his marriage falling apart. However, by the time that he sought to possess a gun even the government admitted that he was in good shape and presented no type of threat.
The Sixth Circuit's panel opinion authored by Circuit Judge Danny Boggs, joined by Senior Circuit Judge Eugene Siler and concurred to by Circuit Judge Julia Gibbons not only reversed but remanded with instructions that judgment be entered for Tyler unless the government disputed that he was emotionally and mentally fit.
In all honesty, the grant of en banc review is puzzling. The Sixth Circuit is, it often appears, resolutely and reflexively divided between appointees of Republican presidents and appointees of Democratic presidents. The en banc panel, assuming that Judge Siler chooses to participate, would be weighted 10-6 in favor of Republican appointees and all of the panel members are in that large majority bloc. So one wonders what issue caused a majority of the circuit judges to favor en banc review, a step that usually can be interpreted as a measure to eliminate a panel decision, the recent decision in EEOC v Ford Motor Company being one example and an illustration of the Court's divide, or to, if not eliminate it, defang it to meaninglessness.
Robert L. Abell
www.RobertAbellLaw.com
Comments