United States of America v. David Torgerson

Background David Torgerson argued on appeal that 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(3), the federal drug-user-in-possession statute, facially violates the Second Amendment. The appeal came from the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota. The court’s reasoning The panel stated that prior Eighth Circuit decisions bind later panels. It explained that federal law bars unlawful users of or addicts to controlled substances from possessing firearms and said a recent Eighth Circuit case, United States v. Veasley, confirmed that the statute is constitutional on its face. The court also cited United States v. Seay and said any disagreement with that precedent must be directed to the en banc court rather than a three-judge panel. In this circuit only an en banc court may overrule a panel decision . . . . Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Elgin Warehouse & Equip., 4 F.3d 567, 571 (8th Cir. 1993) What it means going forward In the Eighth Circuit, defendants cannot obtain relief from a facial Second Amendment challenge to Section 922(g)(3) before a panel where existing circuit precedent upholds the statute.