Legal Opinion
Beers v. Attorney Gen. United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided June 20, 2019No. 17-3010PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROTH, Circuit Judge *152INTRODUCTION
Federal law prohibits the possession of firearms by anyone who has previously been adjudicated as mentally ill or committed to a mental institution. Bradley Beers challenges this law on the ground that, as applied to him, it violates the Second Amendment.
Mentally ill individuals have traditionally been prohibited from possessing guns because they were considered to be a danger to themselves and to others. Beers cannot factually distinguish himself from this historically-barred class because a court has determined that Beers was a danger to himself and thereby…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- District of Columbia v. HellerSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- United States v. MarzzarellaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- Daniel Binderup v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
- United States v. BeanSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Clifford Tyler v. Hillsdale County Sheriff's Dep'tCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2016
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Bryan Range v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2023
- Bryan Range v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2024
- Lisa Folajtar v. Attorney General USACourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020
- United States v. Jeffrey BoydCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2021
- Duy Mai v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.