D.C

Dec. 23 (UPI) — The federal government is suing Washington, D.C., to ease its gun-ownership laws, which are the strictest in the nation.

The U.S. Department of Justice filed the suit Monday in federal court seeking to declare the laws unconstitutional and prevent the District from enforcing them. The laws ban most semiautomatic rifles and other firearms from being registered with the police department. This makes any possession of those guns illegal. AK-47s and AR-15s are among those that are illegal. Those owning those guns can face misdemeanor charges and fines.

The action “underscores our ironclad commitment to protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. “Washington, D.C.’s ban on some of America’s most popular firearms is an unconstitutional infringement on the Second Amendment — living in our nation’s capital should not preclude law-abiding citizens from exercising their fundamental constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

The suit cites District of Columbia v. Heller, which was decided by the Supreme Court in 2008. Before Heller, the District made it illegal to carry unregistered firearms but it also banned the registration of handguns. The Heller decision said that people can have guns in their homes for self-defense.

After Heller, the District updated its gun laws and included a registry and training requirements. But it still makes assault rifles impossible to register.

The suit filed by the Justice Department argues the merit of the law.

“D.C.’s current semi-automatic firearms prohibition that bans many commonly used pistols, rifles or shotguns is based on little more than cosmetics, appearance, or the ability to attach accessories, and fails to take into account whether the prohibited weapon is ‘in common use today’ or that law-abiding citizens may use these weapons for lawful purposes protected by the Second Amendment. Therefore, the District’s restrictions lack legal basis,” the filing said.

D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser, a Democrat, said in a statement Monday, reported by the Washington Post, that the District would “vigorously defend our right to make decisions that keep our city safe.”

“Gun violence destroys families, upends communities, and threatens our collective sense of safety. MPD has saved lives by taking illegal guns off our streets — efforts that have been praised by our federal partners,” Bowser said. “It is irresponsible to take any steps that would lead to more, and deadlier, guns in our communities, especially semi-automatic rifles like AR-15s.”

Lawyers from Everytown Law, a gun safety organization, said the city’s gun bans are legal.

“The legal consensus is clear: assault weapon bans are constitutional. Since the Supreme Court’s rulings in Bruen and Rahimi, federal courts have repeatedly affirmed that these laws are consistent with the Second Amendment,” Bill Taylor, deputy director of Second Amendment litigation at Everytown Law, said in a statement. “Assault weapons are designed for mass devastation, and we look forward to supporting D.C. as it defends this critical common-sense safety measure.”

District of Columbia U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro told prosecutors in August not to enforce felony charges for the city’s ban on openly carrying rifles and shotguns in public or the city’s ban on magazines that hold more than 10 bullets.

Dec. 15 (UPI) — A judge in Connecticut on Monday ordered the disbarment of Hunter Biden after his convictions on federal gun and tax charges and then pardoned by his father, Joe Biden, as president.

In Waterbury, Judge Trial Referee Patrick Carroll III suspended him from practicing law in the state after finding he violated the rules of professional conduct for attorneys.

In April, Biden voluntarily surrendered his license to practice law in Washington, D.C.

The judge found he violated several ethical rules for lawyers, including engaging in conduct for “dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. Carroll also cited the Washington disbarment in his decision.

During the virtual hearing, Biden, 55, didn’t contest the decision and didn’t speak. He appeared with his lawyer, Ross Garber.

Biden graduated from Yale Law School and passed the bar one year later in 1997. But Biden apparently hadn’t practiced law in recent years with no cases in state or civil court.

A reciprocal discipline was imposed in the District of Columbia, where Biden lives and consented to disbarment. There were two other grievances filed by private individuals after Biden’s federal convictions on tax and gun charges last year.

Paul Dorsey, a private attorney who filed a grievance, objected to the proposed resolution because Biden does not admit to the criminal acts.

“It was very frustrating, very odd, and frankly, I don’t think the court should accept the proposed disposition as it is written because it doesn’t comply with the Practice Book. He has to admit to it, and he’s not doing that,” Dorsey said.

The proposed disposition does not include the admission of a crime because of Biden’s pardon by his father on Dec. 1, Leanne M. Larson, first assistant chief disciplinary counsel, said.

In Delaware federal court, he was found guilty of purchasing a gun in 2018 while allegedly lying on a federal form about not illegally using or being addicted to drugs. He was scheduled to be sentenced before the pardon, facing up to 25 years in prison. As a first-time offender, he could have stayed out of prison.

Biden also faced charges in California for not paying at least $1.4 million in federal taxes. He agreed to plead guilty to misdemeanor and felony charges hours before jury selection was scheduled to begin in September 2024.

After the pardon, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika closed the gun case, though she didn’t toss out the conviction.

The federal pardon covered the gun and tax offenses and any “offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014, through December 1, 2024.”

“Today, I signed a pardon for my son Hunter,” Biden said in a statement. “From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted.”

Biden said it was clear that his son was “treated differently” than other people who have faced similar circumstances, and that Hunter Biden was “singled out because he is my son.”

The younger Biden said in a statement that he has taken accountability and responsibility for his mistakes “during the darkest days of my addiction.”

“I will never take the clemency I have been given today for granted and will devote the life I have rebuilt to helping those who are still sick and suffering,” he said.