Yesterday, we filed the Petition for Rehearing En Banc in Hollis v. Lynch. A summary:
En banc review is necessary for this Court to consider a question of exceptional importance: whether the Second Amendment protects a bearable arm; an M16 machinegun lawfully owned by a law-abiding citizen. In holding that the Second Amendment does not protect bearable machineguns, the panel diminished the holding in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) then elevated Heller’s dicta to binding precedent. The panel did not address or resolve Appellant’s as-applied challenge to the law. The panel did not conduct a historical analysis to determine if the arm was in the scope of the Second Amendment as understood when the Second Amendment was ratified because, as Heller stated: “Constitutional rights are enshrined with the scope they were understood to have when the people adopted them, whether or not future legislatures or (yes) even future judges think that scope too broad. Id. at 634–35.
You can read the entire filing here.