Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court declines challenges to gun laws
Reuters ^ | Feb 24, 2014 | LAWRENCE HURLEY

Posted on 02/25/2014 10:10:08 AM PST by neverdem

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to wade into the politically volatile issue of gun control by leaving intact three court rulings rejecting challenges to federal and state laws.

The court's decision not to hear the cases represented a loss for gun rights advocates, including the National Rifle Association, which was behind two of the challenges.

The first case involved a challenge by the NRA to a Texas law that prevents 18-20 year olds from carrying handguns in public. It also raised the broader question of whether there is a broad right under the Second Amendment to bear arms in public.

The second NRA case was a challenge to several federal laws and regulations, dating back to 1968, that make it illegal for firearms dealers to sell guns or ammunition to anyone under 21...

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: banglist; docket; lawsuit; ruling; scotus
Both the pro and anti Second Amendment Justices in the Heller and McDonald decisions could have granted cert. After Robert's behavior with Obamacare, neither right nor left want to take any chances with him, not on really important decisions, IMHO.
1 posted on 02/25/2014 10:10:08 AM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Pretty much the left owns every political position they want. The gun thing was the last one they didn’t have control of.


2 posted on 02/25/2014 10:13:05 AM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I believe it takes only the votes of four justices for the court to take a case. Obviously at least 6 justices didn’t think there was anything to decide and that the lower court was right.


3 posted on 02/25/2014 10:14:25 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Let the lower courts do the dirty work, then decline to enter the fray.

Nice.

Obama approves.
Congress is AWOL. Again.


4 posted on 02/25/2014 10:14:27 AM PST by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

These are puny peripheral issues.

The important cases are the state bans of semi-auto rifles, and the defacto state bans on bearing arms outside the home.

They won’t duck those.

And once it is established that the “right to bear arms” includes carrying a loaded pistol outside the home, it will then be the right time to extend that to 18-20 year old adults.

The case in which DC residents can’t buy in VA will be largely addressed when DC gets their rights more fully restored.


5 posted on 02/25/2014 10:16:25 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed ("Income Inequality?" Let's start with Washington DC vs. the rest of the nation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

C O W A R D S ! ! ! ! !.................


6 posted on 02/25/2014 10:17:32 AM PST by Red Badger (LIberal is an oxymoron......................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Ahh just to take a trip down to NSA and see all the dirt they’ve dug up on all the SC Justices and congressional members. I wonder how many terrabytes they have stored on just them alone. I bet it would be interesting reading...: )


7 posted on 02/25/2014 10:24:03 AM PST by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

In my opinion, someone wants these cases to wait until there are more leftists on the the SCROTUS.


8 posted on 02/25/2014 10:26:42 AM PST by bkopto (Free men are not equal. Equal men are not free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Atlas Sneezed

I agree.


9 posted on 02/25/2014 10:30:15 AM PST by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

Often times the justices don’t grant cert because they don’t want to lose and be stuck with the precedent.
I would be willing to bet the lefties were happy to leave the lower court opinions in place, and our guys on the “right” were scared of either Kennedy or Roberts.
I know I would be conflicted, unless I had some assurances beforehand that my side would win.


10 posted on 02/25/2014 10:31:34 AM PST by Clump ( the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Who gives a crap what the law says anymore about this?

We have a lawless president, a lawless AG and a lawless congress.

Why should we worry about laws when they aren’t enforced by the “lawmakers” or “enforcers”?

They can’t shoot us all.


11 posted on 02/25/2014 10:33:12 AM PST by TomServo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

After the disastrous ruling on Obummer care I have NO faith in Roberts. It is a 5-4 court. I do not know what the bastards have on Roberts but it must be big. So I do not want them to take another run at the 2nd. This is not what we wanted but all things considered it be could be worse..much worse.


12 posted on 02/25/2014 10:41:29 AM PST by gibsonguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Atlas Sneezed
The important cases are the state bans of semi-auto rifles, and the defacto state bans on bearing arms outside the home.

They won’t duck those.

Don't be so sure. In 2010 the court denied cert in People v. James, a case challenging California's assault weapons ban.link

They've also denied cert in several carry permit cases:

the Court denied review in Kachalsky v. Cacace, a case in which the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a New York law prohibiting the issuance of a concealed carry permit unless the applicant can demonstrate that good cause exists to issue the permit. The Court also denied review in Woollard v. Gallagher and Williams v. State of Maryland, cases challenging a similar concealed carry permit scheme in Maryland. link

13 posted on 02/25/2014 10:41:52 AM PST by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001
0bama to Roberts (again):

"Those are nice looking kids you got there; Be a real shame if someone sent them back to Ireland.."

14 posted on 02/25/2014 10:44:58 AM PST by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“...dating back to 1968, that make it illegal for firearms dealers to sell guns or ammunition to anyone under 21...”

There is no federal law against selling guns/ammo to those under 21.


15 posted on 02/25/2014 10:46:13 AM PST by Beagle8U (Unions are an Affirmative Action program for Slackers! .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; Lurking Libertarian; Perdogg; JDW11235; Clairity; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; GregNH; ...

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

16 posted on 02/25/2014 10:48:18 AM PST by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gibsonguy

Whatever they have on Roberts, they had long before he was even nominated. That means he should never have been nominated.


17 posted on 02/25/2014 10:53:31 AM PST by VerySadAmerican (".....Barrack, and the horse Mohammed rode in on.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: FReepers

Click The Pic To Donate

Support FR, Donate Monthly If You Can

18 posted on 02/25/2014 10:54:19 AM PST by DJ MacWoW (The Fed Gov is not one ring to rule them all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Atlas Sneezed
These are puny peripheral issues.

The important cases are the state bans of semi-auto rifles, and the defacto state bans on bearing arms outside the home.

They won’t duck those.

We shall see.

San Diego Sheriff will not seek 9th Circuit en banc in Peruta right to carry case

Assuming that the San Diego Sheriff does not file a petition for a writ of certiorari, the U.S. Supreme Court still has an available case to consider right to carry. Drake v. Jerejian is an appeal from a Third Circuit decision upholding New Jersey’s carry licensing system, under which almost no-one is ever issued in a permit. (Scotusblog docket for the case is here.) Several amicus briefs were filed in support of the petition, including one written by Wyoming Attorney General Michael and joined by the Attorneys General of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and West Virginia. Lead attorney in the Drake case is Alan Gura, winner of District of Columbia v. Heller.

19 posted on 02/25/2014 10:55:48 AM PST by neverdem (Register pressure cookers! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Basically the SCOTUS refusing to wade into politically turbulent waters because they’re wusses. That was why they were given lifelong employment, to be able to stay above such considerations. Another in a long line of indicators that our republic no longer works.


20 posted on 02/25/2014 10:55:53 AM PST by Kevmo ("A person's a person, no matter how small" ~Horton Hears a Who)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Crooked lawyers with black robes.


21 posted on 02/25/2014 10:55:58 AM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomServo
They can’t shoot us all.

With the number of rounds of ammo they have bough over the last few years, they certainly could shoot us all many times over, especially if we stood still.

22 posted on 02/25/2014 11:02:42 AM PST by itsahoot (Voting for RINOs is the same as voting for any other Tyrant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]



We are within striking distance for yellow today!

Keep Free Republic Alive with YOUR Donations!

Make a difference.

PLEASE Contribute Today!

Woo hoo!! Less than $600 to the yellow!! We can do this.

23 posted on 02/25/2014 11:17:33 AM PST by RedMDer (May we always be happy and may our enemies always know it. - Sarah Palin, 10-18-2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem; All
I'm not expert in gun law history, but federal gun laws for civilians seem to appear in the books during the FDR's presidency when the federal government began to blatantly ignore its constitutionally-limited powers.

Also, note that John Bingham, the main author of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment, had officially clarified in the congressional record that the 14th Amendment applied the 2nd Amendment to the states. See the 2nd Amendment in Bingham's discussion roughly in the middle of the 2nd column of the page at the following link.

Appendix to the Congressional Globe

24 posted on 02/25/2014 11:33:36 AM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
With the number of rounds of ammo they have bought over the last few years, they certainly could shoot us all many times over, especially if we stood still.

And didn't shoot back.

25 posted on 02/25/2014 11:34:20 AM PST by TangoLimaSierra (To win the country back, we need to be as mean as the libs say we are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Free people don’t need to ask permission.


26 posted on 02/25/2014 11:35:41 AM PST by Tzimisce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

Aren’t those children grown by now? How old are they?


27 posted on 02/25/2014 11:38:07 AM PST by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The fix is in?


28 posted on 02/25/2014 11:38:16 AM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
Let the lower courts do the dirty work, then decline to enter the fray.

That's essentially the Congress's approach:

  1. Create bureaucracies, allow them to make rules/regulations which must be obeyed under penalty of law, then wring their hands about executive overreach… even though they could (1) repeal the laws referencing the rules/regulations, (2) dissolve the agencies directly, or (3) utterly deny the agency funding.
  2. Allow the Federal Reserve to make monetary policy, and then when people don't like it and want financial accountability, hide under the fact that the Federal Reserve is private entity.

29 posted on 02/25/2014 11:40:41 AM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

I believe that federal law currently prohibits the sale of handguns or ammo for them to anyone under 21.


30 posted on 02/25/2014 11:41:27 AM PST by Pecos (The Chicago Way: Kill the Constitution, one step at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Pecos

“The second NRA case was a challenge to several federal laws and regulations, dating back to 1968, that make it illegal for firearms dealers to sell guns or ammunition to anyone under 21...”

Nothing in there about handguns, that is what my comment was about.

It may be a law in some states, but it isn’t federal.


31 posted on 02/25/2014 11:52:16 AM PST by Beagle8U (Unions are an Affirmative Action program for Slackers! .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

The Court often denies cert repeatedly on some issues before eventually taking up the issue in the right case.


32 posted on 02/25/2014 11:57:34 AM PST by Atlas Sneezed ("Income Inequality?" Let's start with Washington DC vs. the rest of the nation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10

Thanks for the link!


33 posted on 02/25/2014 12:00:26 PM PST by neverdem (Register pressure cookers! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
even though they could (1) repeal the laws referencing the rules/regulations, (2) dissolve the agencies directly, or (3) utterly deny the agency funding.

Legislatures can also make any law beyond the jurisdiction of the courts, which they create and fund.

34 posted on 02/25/2014 12:07:49 PM PST by Count of Monte Fisto (The foundation of modern society is the denial of reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Count of Monte Fisto

Right, but I was commenting on how the technique of letting subordinates run amok and then take no interest in restraining them is also employed by our congress.


35 posted on 02/25/2014 12:11:10 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
I believe it takes only the votes of four justices for the court to take a case.

I'm fairly certain that's true.

Obviously at least 6 justices didn’t think there was anything to decide and that the lower court was right.

I don't thick that's true. Anthony Kennedy is big on individual rights. He was in the majority in Heller and McDonald. I believe it's split 4 - 4. Neither side trusts Roberts now, IMHO.

36 posted on 02/25/2014 12:20:36 PM PST by neverdem (Register pressure cookers! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

bkmk


37 posted on 02/25/2014 12:54:46 PM PST by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The court will decline any case that strengthens gun rights.
They accept all cases where they can weaken them.

The US courts are no longer on our side.


38 posted on 02/25/2014 1:09:59 PM PST by CodeToad (Keeping whites from talking about blacks is verbal segregation!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
"When the law no longer protects you from the corrupt,
but protects the corrupt from you -
you know your nation is doomed."

-Ayn Rand

39 posted on 02/25/2014 1:12:28 PM PST by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Some perspective here, folks. It took SC(R)OTUS over 70 years to take on Heller from the last seminal 2A case which was Miller.

As it stands, the really interesting case is the one in the 9th circus. That one is not ripe for an appeal to SC(R)OTUS until we see what happens en banc. If it stands en banc, then I think we’ll have a day in court.

Heller notwithstanding, I’m not a fan of the go-to-court strategy. Trusting our liberties to 9 political hacks in black muumuus just doesn’t appeal to me.


40 posted on 02/25/2014 1:43:11 PM PST by RKBA Democrat (Liberty in our Lifetime - WWW.FreeStateProject.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U
"There is no federal law against selling guns/ammo to those under 21."

Yes, there is. It is the Gun Control Act of 1968, as codified in Chapter 44 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

The ammunition is prohibited only if it is considered "handgun ammunition" which most calibers (thanks to AR & AK pistols and "The Judge") of rifle and shotgun ammo are.

The FFL cannot sell a handgun to a person under 21. Under-21 Americans can buy a handgun from a private party, though. No mention of ammo.

41 posted on 02/25/2014 2:54:48 PM PST by backwoods-engineer (Blog: www.BackwoodsEngineer.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
and America takes another one in the........

42 posted on 02/25/2014 2:58:30 PM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -vvv- NO Pity for the LAZY - 86-44)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomServo

Well said, TS...I’m with you...


43 posted on 02/25/2014 3:22:16 PM PST by matginzac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


We are within striking distance for yellow!

Keep Free Republic Alive with YOUR Donations!
Make a difference.
PLEASE Contribute Today!

Woo hoo!! And now over less than $250 to the yellow!!

44 posted on 02/25/2014 6:32:55 PM PST by RedMDer (May we always be happy and may our enemies always know it. - Sarah Palin, 10-18-2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: backwoods-engineer

Read what they wrote again. They said guns and ammo sales to those under 21 were banned. That is false.

They didn’t say handguns and handgun ammo.


45 posted on 02/26/2014 8:04:00 AM PST by Beagle8U (Unions are an Affirmative Action program for Slackers! .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Atlas Sneezed
The case in which DC residents can’t buy in VA will be largely addressed when DC gets their rights more fully restored.

I hope you're referring to the 2nd Amendment rights alone and not the larger issue that the left has been lobbying for during the last 50+ years for DC to have it's own Senator and Representative, because that would just be a guaranteed pickup for the leftist extremists. Forever.

46 posted on 02/26/2014 8:21:22 AM PST by ExSoldier (Stand up and be counted... OR LINE UP AND BE NUMBERED...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WashingtonSource
I'd refer you to this:

or any of a number of search engine hits:

47 posted on 02/26/2014 11:13:43 AM PST by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

And even if the kids were 50 years old it still wouldn’t excuse Roberts of breaking Irish laws and U.S. Laws by doing what he did.


48 posted on 02/26/2014 11:16:24 AM PST by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot
especially if we stood still.

And there you have it. I don't plan on standing still.

49 posted on 02/26/2014 5:32:19 PM PST by TomServo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

Commonly held firearms are for a polite society which respects rule-of-law and observes the boundaries agreed to for membership.


50 posted on 02/27/2014 6:32:04 PM PST by Ozark Tom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson