Shooting \u3cem\u3eHeller\u3c/em\u3e in the Foot?: Applying and Misapplying \u3cem\u3eDistrict of Columbia v. Heller\u3c/em\u3e\u27s Presumptively Lawful Dicta in \u3cem\u3eUnited States v. Skoien\u3c/em\u3e

On July 13, 2010, an en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in United States v. Skoien upheld 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), a federal ban on the possession of firearms by domestic violence misdemeanants, against a Second Amendment challenge. In reaching its holding, the Seventh Circuit declined to follow either of two analytical frameworks that lower courts have applied to Second Amendment challenges since the U.S. Supreme Court’s groundbreaking 2008 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller. This Comment argues that, although the Skoien en banc opinion ignores an important piece of the Heller Court’s dicta, its analysis is generally faithful to Heller and should serve as a model for other courts of appeals until the Supreme Court provides additional guidance