[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-567789-105":59,"doc-detail-567789-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","appeals-court-upholds-handgun-records-checks-sheriffs-to-appeal","APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS HANDGUN RECORDS CHECKS; SHERIFFS TO APPEAL","","Federal appellate judges in San Francisco upheld the Brady Law requirement that local law enforcement agencies conduct background checks on prospective handgun buyers. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court ruled the checks were only a minor burden and did not violate state sovereignty, while a dissent argued the law would concentrate power at the federal level. The decision keeps a five-day handgun sale wait and limits federal mandates to avoid undue interference, yet pending appeals challenge related rulings in other states.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/appeals-court-upholds-handgun-records-checks-sheriffs-to-appeal/567789/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/appeals-court-upholds-handgun-records-checks-sheriffs-to-appeal/567789.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"awa","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-15","2026-10-13",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":8},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What did the federal appeals court uphold regarding handgun sales?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It upheld the Brady Law requirement that local law enforcement agencies check the backgrounds of prospective handgun buyers.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What parts of the Brady Law were central to the court’s decision?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The ruling addressed the background-check requirement and kept the five-day waiting period before a handgun sale.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Why did some judges disagree, and what legal principle did they rely on?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"A dissent viewed the law as a step toward federal power. Other judges relied on the Constitution’s 10th Amendment to protect state sovereignty from certain federal interference.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},567789,1792100117,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":8,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},3985747858093,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","# A COMPREHENSIVE AND INDEPENDENT NEWS SUMMARY FOR THE LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONAL\n\nWol.29 No.37  \nSeptember 15,1995  \nBrady Law:  \n# APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS HANDGUNRECORDS CHECKS;SHIERIFFS TO APPEAL\n\nRebuffing a National Rifle Association(NRA)challenge,a Federal appeals court in SanFrancisco Sept.8 upheld the Brady law's require-ment that local law enforcement agencies check thebackgrounds of prospective handgun buyers.  \nIn the first ruling on the issue by an appellatecourt,the 9th U.S.Circuit Court of Appeals saidthe records checks were only a minor burden thatdid not violate state sovereignty.A dissentingjudge called the law \"a step toward concentratingpower in the hands of the Federal Government.\"  \nThe law,effective in March 1994,requires afive-day wait before sale of a handgun.During thewait,local authorities must make \"reasonable ef-forts\"to determine whether the buyer has a felonyrecord,a history of mental illness or drug use,orother problems that would make the sale illegal.  \nIn response to NRA-sponsored lawsuits bylocal law enforcement officers,five Federaljudges-in Montana,Arizona,Louisiana,Missis-sippi and Vermon-have ruled that the Federalgovernment cannot require local agencies to con-duct the background checks.  \nThe judges relied on the Constitution's 10thAmendment,which protects state and local gov-ernments from some types of Federal interference.They struck down the records-check requirementbut left the law's five-day waiting period in effect.  \nThe Sept.82-1 ruling overturned the deci-sions in Montana and Arizona and also applied to  \n(See BRADY LAW,page two)  \nISSN 0011-1295  \nWASHING1ON CRIME NEWS SERVICES′TU  L  \nPage 1  \nINTHISISSUE                 \nBRADY LAW:Upheld By Federal Appeals Cour……1  \nJUVENILE CRIME:It's Going To Get Worse…  ……1  \nDIGITAL MUGSHOTS:Focus Of Conference…   …3  \nTERRORISM:More Attacks Expected In U.S.………4  \nKCK:New Chief Takes Over………     …    …5  \nHARTFORD:Union Fights New Hiring Standards.….…5  \nMARIJUANA:Use Doubles Among Teen …    ……6  \nATLANTA:Hit By Corruption………    …7  \nCOPS:Senate Committee Kills Punding …  …  ……·8  \nNEW ORLEANS:Ex-Policewoman Gets Death Sentence.9  \nSANTA FE:Chief Has A Troubled Tenure…     ……9  \nDOJ ISSUES FIRST NATIONALREPORT ON JUVENILEOFFENDERS AND VICTIMS  \nA new report,released Sept.7 by theDepartment of Justice estimates that,if currenttrends continue,juvenile violent crime arrests willmore than double by the year 2010.The estimateis based on juvenile arrest trend data from 1983through 1992 and a projected 22 percent increase inthe juvenile population.  \n\"This report is a road map to the next gener-ation of crime-unless we do something now,\"saidAttorney General Janet Reno.\"We must begin byfully implementing last year's crime bill,with itsfocus on 100,000 new community police,new drugcourts,prisons,and real prevention and early inter-vention if we are to stop young delinquents frombecoming career criminals.\"  \n(See JUVENILES,page zhree)  \nCRIME CONTROL DIGEST  \n(BRADY LAW,from page one)  \nseven other states in the nation's largest Federalcircuit.Appeals of the other rulings are pendingelsewhere.  \n\"The obligation imposed on state officers bythe Brady Act is no more remarkable than,say,theFederally imposed duties of state officers to reportmissing children...or traffic fatalities,\"said theopinion by Judge William Canby.  \nHe said the Federal Government \"can enliststate employees in implementing Federal pro-grams\"as long as the government does not intrudeon state sovereignty by ordering states to pass laws,and does not impose severe burdens on state orlocal officials.  \nCanby said the Brady law appeared to require the sheriffs to do nothing more than checkcomputer records and explain why a particularbuyer was rejected.  \nSheriffs PLam To Appeal  \nThe two sheriffs who lost the ruling said theywould seck a rehearing before a larger court panol,thenappeal to the Supreme Court if necessary.The highcourt recently relied on the 10th Amendment in strikingdow","cbCaiqMPmvbrDdeq","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiqMPmvbrDdeq","pdf",3448649,11,"English","# BRADY LAW: APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS HANDGUN RECORDS CHECKS; SHERIFFS TO APPEAL\n## Court ruling and rationale\n## Five-day waiting period and “reasonable efforts”\n## Separate-state sovereignty arguments and outcomes\n## Sheriffs’ planned rehearing and appeals\n## Justice Department defense and BATF survey","[{\"question\":\"What did the federal appeals court uphold regarding handgun sales?\",\"answer\":\"It upheld the Brady Law requirement that local law enforcement agencies check the backgrounds of prospective handgun buyers.\"},{\"question\":\"What parts of the Brady Law were central to the court’s decision?\",\"answer\":\"The ruling addressed the background-check requirement and kept the five-day waiting period before a handgun sale.\"},{\"question\":\"Why did some judges disagree, and what legal principle did they rely on?\",\"answer\":\"A dissent viewed the law as a step toward federal power. Other judges relied on the Constitution’s 10th Amendment to protect state sovereignty from certain federal interference.\"}]","APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS HANDGUN RECORDS CHECKS; SHERIFFS TO APPEAL | PDF",1791867944,28]