search
top

Civil Rights Victory in Pennsylvania

The case is Binderup v. Holder, filed in the Eastern District of PA. The plaintiff was convicted years ago of Corruption of Minors for having sex with a 17 year old. In Pennsylvania, Corruption of Minors is a misdemeanor, but has a possible sentence of up to five years, so it applies for the purposes of a federal prohibition. Corruption in Pennsylvania tends to occur for one of two things, alcohol and sex. Often both. Furnishing liquor to minors in Pennsylvania can cost you your gun rights. So can sex between a 18 year old and 17 year old. The age of consent in Pennsylvania is 16, so the charge is not Statutory Rape, but Corruption of Minors is still an option for the prosecution.

This is an “as applied” challenge, meaning the statute was challenged as applied to this person’s individual circumstance. It was not a facial challenge to the statute as a whole. This would presumably apply to other persons similarly situated to this defendant. To read more details about this case, see Of Arms and the Law and also Alan Gura’s blog, who is the attorney who argued this case.

Slowly but surely, we are chipping away here and there. The other side may brag about our defeats, but we’ve also had some very important and circumstantial wins. There are a lot of people in Pennsylvania, who are no threat to anyone, who have gotten caught in this trap. Now there may finally be some relief for them.

4 Responses to “Civil Rights Victory in Pennsylvania”

  1. Zermoid says:

    Question, you said:
    “Furnishing liquor to minors in Pennsylvania can cost you your gun rights. So can sex between a 18 year old and 17 year old.”

    You sure about that second part? I have always been told as long as the 2 were within 3 years of age it was legal. Which would make 18 and 15 years ok, but 18 and 14 somebody’s going to jail.

    • Dollup15 says:

      Sex between an 18 and 17 year old would not be statutory rape under PA law (nor was it in this case), but it still could potentially be corruption of minors, something which is usually a very minor offense (the man in this case got a small fine), but it has the potential to be 5 years in prison, which is why the federal law prohibits gun ownership if convicted.

    • Renegade_Azzy says:

      I would say its probably clear as mud. PA lawmakers seem to have some puritanical bent to them, thus our liquor and beer laws.

      • mike says:

        PA lawmakers seem to have some puritanical bent to them, thus our liquor and beer laws.

        Nope. That’s because PA Republicans are as beholden to unions as PA Democrats are. Those state liquor stores are unionized, and the unions rightly realize that the only people dumb enough to keep paying for those workers and their pensions (!!!) are taxpayers.

top