Posted on 12/07/2015 7:34:36 AM PST by TroutStalker
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to review the ability of cities and states to prohibit semiautomatic high-capacity assault weapons that have been used in some of the nation’s most deadly recent mass shootings.
The justices decided not to reconsider a lower court’s decision in a case from the city of Highland Park, Ill., near Chicago. But seven states — Maryland, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York — have similar bans, and all of the prohibitions remain in place.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia said the court should review the ban, which “flouts†the court’s Second Amendment jurisprudence. They criticized lower court decisions that have allowed jurisdictions and impose what Thomas called “categorical bans on firearms that millions of Americans commonly own for lawful purposes.â€
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Yeah...San Bernardino should have banned them.../s
If there is a split of opinion among the Federal Circuits about this issue, the Court will be inclined to grant certiorari when it comes up again.
Not unusual. The Supreme Court has never reviewed any of the several local and statewide assault weapons bans.
SCOTUS is as corrupt as the WH and Congress.
We need to stop using “semi-automatic” and describe these as not machine guns. This is not a machine gun. It only shoots one shot at a time.
Laws infringing on the individual, God-given right to keep and bear arms, including AR-style rifles with standard-capacity magazines (or whatever magazine capacity a United States citizen decides to keep and bear), are clearly unconstitutional. I hope the Supreme Court will review those laws within the next few years.
Please, please, PLEASE fix the FR problem with quotes and apostrophes.
SCOTUS ping. (Note that this is a denial of cert., not a decision on the merits, albeit with two dissents).
Best thing to do is for victims and families of victims join in class action suits against big business.
Say for instance a company has a gun free zone policy on their property and someone was victimized on the way or on their property, They should be sued based on the fact that you could not defend yourself.
grabbers do not care. It is merely a way fro them to further divide into little bite size bits to better enable them to "convince" the masses that THOSE have to go.
Don't fall for it. Support your God given right to defend yourself, the functionality of the tool is immaterial, except for how effective it may be in your hands.
All posters have to do is delete and retype them in the 'preview'. Problem solved.
To pedantically correct, all guns shoot one shot at a time. It is just a matter of whether a single trigger pull initiates more than one shot.
This wasn't a problem in the past. Why won't the software accept alternate forms of punctuation marks now?
Let’s hope that’s after several of the SCOTUS members have been retired and replaced by true conservatives.
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.