Posts Tagged Supreme Court

Supreme Court Justices Reveal Their Ignorance On Guns In Oral Arguments

From The Federalist:

The key differences between automatic and semiautomatic weapons with bump stocks were largely lost on the justices, especially Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan, who repeatedly insisted bump stock-equipped guns can fire up to 800 rounds a second. They, along with the government’s legal team, repeated the lie that semiautomatic rifles with modifiers could fire hundreds of shots (in Kagan’s words, “a torrent of bullets”) each moment. Cargill lawyer Johnathan Mitchell corrected them multiple times.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Fisherman Case Could Destroy The ATF and The Administrative State

From Ammoland:

The cases are Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce. The cases ask the Supreme Court to consider more than just the question of whether the government can force a private enterprise to bear the monetary costs of accommodating a government function. It challenges what’s referred to as the Chevron doctrine, a legal doctrine that arose from a previous Supreme Court decision that has over time given wide swath to federal agencies to sort of fill in the holes – if you will – of how the government is to enforce a law when the statute passed by Congress doesn’t explicitly dictate it. It basically allows unelected federal bureaucrats to create laws. Under the Chevron Doctrine, the federal judiciary gives deference to federal agencies’ interpretation of the law, and some would argue abdicate their constitutional responsibility to say what the law means.  Chevron deference is the lifeblood of the “administrative state.”

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Coincidence? Murder Rate Fell Over 6% After Bruen Decision

From The Hill:

The FBI’s annual crime report, released Monday, found that violent crime in the U.S. last year decreased while property crime is on the rise. Overall, violent crime dropped 1.7 percent, including a 6.1 percent decrease in murder and non-negligent manslaughter. 

The murder rate in the U.S. continues to fall after it jumped nearly 30 percent during the pandemic in 2020. In 2022, the rate was 6.3 homicide offenses per 100,000 people. This is down from the 2021 rate of 6.8 homicides per 100,000 people.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Media Uses Headlines About Rahimi Case To Create A Narrative

From Ammoland:

The dominant media headlines ignore the crux of the case. In headline after headline, they claim the case is whether people who commit domestic violence can be disarmed. Nothing in the case challenges the power of the government to disarm people who are convicted of domestic violence. Rahimi was never convicted of domestic violence.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Rahimi Case Argued At The Supreme Court

From Reason:

The government can disarm “dangerous individuals” without violating the Second Amendment, U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the Supreme Court on Tuesday. J. Matthew Wright, the lawyer arguing the other side of United States v. Rahimi, agreed with that general principle. But he did not agree that the federal law Prelogar was defending, which criminalizes gun possession by people who are subject to domestic violence restraining orders, fits within that tradition.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court To Hear Bump Stock Case

From The Truth About Guns:

Time to lay in a heavier supply of popcorn. Today the Supreme Court granted cert in Cargill v. Garland, the case challenging the Trump era bump stock ban. The about face by the ATF following the Las Vegas mass shooting came at the direction of the Trump administration. ATF, which had previously approved sales of bump fire stocks as legal accessories used regulatory fiat to do a 180 and reclassify them as machine guns.

, , , , , , ,

No Comments

Rahimi Case Has Serious Consequences

From The Federalist:

The question before the court is: What is the standard of evidence needed to strip someone of their constitutional right to keep and bear arms? People lose their right to a gun when convicted of felonies and some violent misdemeanors. But should they lose that right after a mere noncriminal, civil decision — in the absence of a public hearing and a lawyer? 

, , , , ,

No Comments

SAF Gottlieb On The Current Gun Rights Legal Battles

From Cam and Company:

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

FPC’s Vice President of Legal Is Optimistic For Gun Rights

From Cam and Company:

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Fishing Industry Case Could Restrict ATF’s Power

From Washington Gun Law:

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

FPC Tells Supreme Court Chevron Deference Is Unconstitutional

From Ammoland:

“Chevron violates Article III by transferring from the judiciary to the executive the ultimate interpretative authority to say what the law is,” argues the brief. “It violates Article I by incentivizing Congress to abdicate its legislative duties and delegate legislative authority to the executive. As a result, Chevron accumulates legislative, executive, and judicial powers in a single branch of government—which the Founders considered the very definition of tyranny.”

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court May Take Case That Could Overturn Jan 6 Convictions

From PJ Media:

The law in question sentences a guilty party to up to 20 years in prison for anyone who “corruptly alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document,” or “otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so.” Lang is questioning whether the Sarbanes-Oxley statute fits the behavior of hundreds of rioters.

Sarbanes-Oxley was passed in response to financial malfeasance in the 2002 bankruptcies of telecom giant Worldcom and Enron, an energy company based in Houston. Lang argues that the obstruction defined in Sarbanes-Oxley bears no relationship to the violence that occurred on January 6, 2021.

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court Takes Restraining Order Case

From Ammoland:

The Supreme Court, on the last day available this session, June 30, 2023, agreed to hear a Second Amendment case, United States v. Rahimi.

This is not good news for Second Amendment supporters, but it is also not terrible news. It signals a willingness in the Court to tolerate some Biden administration resistance to recognizing Second Amendment rights as put forward in the Bruen decision last year.

, , , , ,

No Comments

Supreme Court To Hear Case On Domestic Violence Offenders’ Gun Rights

From Bearing Arms:

In its last conference before heading out for summer recess, the Supreme Court granted cert to U.S. v. Rahimi on Friday; setting up a fight over the scope of the Court’s history, text, and tradition test spelled out in last year’s Bruen decision.

, , ,

No Comments

Slate Begrudgingly Admits Felons Should Have Gun Rights

Like a growing number of public defenders, liberal judges like Freeman, Ambro, Greenaway, and Montgomery-Reeves may think that the Second Amendment can be repurposed as a weapon against over-policing and mass incarceration. If upheld by the Supreme Court, Range will certainly be a boon to the criminal defense bar, as well as a source of immense confusion for prosecutors. The majority’s standard is extraordinarily vague: It acknowledges that some people may be disarmed for committing a felony, but a person “like Range” could not. How can judges tell when someone falls on Range’s side of the line?

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments