Opinion ID: 3012371
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: conclusion

Text: Section 925(c) gives district courts jurisdiction to review applications only after a denial by ATF. The appropriations ban renders ATF unable to deny individual felons’ applications, and thus effectively suspendsS 925(c)’s _________________________________________________________________ 27. Pontarelli’s petition illustrates the problem. The District Court heard only from witnesses he handpicked. Not surprisingly, these witnesses described Pontarelli as a nonviolent, morally upright, and productive member of the community, and said that his firearms privileges should be restored. While Pontarelli may have all these attributes, many other convicted felons do not. If we reaffirmed Rice, many more felons would regain their firearms privileges by making similarly one-sided presentations. 25 jurisdictional grant. The legislative history of the appropriations ban confirms that Congress intended to prevent individual felons from regaining firearms privileges. Indeed, Congress could not have meant to confer new jurisdiction on the district courts to restore those privileges because district courts are incapable of predicting accurately which felons will misuse firearms. For these reasons, we overrule Rice and hold that the District Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review Pontarelli’s application. 26