The Government Tried to Permanently Disarm a Peaceable Man Over a 2005 DUI. The 3rd Circuit Said No.

Edward Williams has two Pennsylvania DUI convictions from the early 2000s. The second one — a first-degree misdemeanor that could have carried up to five years — was enough for federal law to treat him like a "felon" under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and strip his right to keep and bear arms for life.

He didn't even know until a lawyer flagged it a decade later. He sold his guns. Then he sued.

On Tuesday, Oct. 13, the 3rd Circuit sitting en banc affirmed that permanently disarming Williams is unconstitutional. Judge Paul Matey wrote for the majority: history supports disarming people who pose a present physical danger — not forever banning someone over a nonviolent misdemeanor from two decades ago. Williams has held the same job for over thirty years, drinks only occasionally, and a psych eval found no addiction or violent tendencies. The government's "habitual drunkard" analogy is the same one the Supreme Court rejected this June in Hemani.

This builds on Range (food-stamp fraud) and widens the crack in lifetime felon-in-possession bans for peaceable people. Six circuits still slam the door; three don't. The circuit split is now louder.

A lifetime ban for a nonviolent misdemeanor is not "longstanding tradition." It's a 1961 expansion. Good ruling.

Sources: Reason / Jacob Sullum, 3rd Circuit opinion (Williams v. Attorney General, No. 24-1091)

Photo: James A. Byrne U.S. Courthouse, Philadelphia (3rd Circuit). Wikimedia Commons.