Groundswell of Second Amendment Cases Seems Destined for the Supreme Court

[Elderberry]

Legal Insurrection by  James Nault 3/17/2024



Federal courts in blue states seem to be upholding the majority of gun control laws, even after landmark Supreme Court decisions upholding the fundamental right to keep and bear arms

We recently posted about the New York Second Amendment case challenging New York’s concealed carry permit law that requires that a permit applicant prove to a local official that he or she is of “good moral character.” Not only is this an absurd requirement (how exactly are you supposed to prove that you have “good moral character”), but even after doing so, said local official then has complete discretion on whether to approve the applicant’s permit request . . . or not. The challengers in the case just asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case after the Second Circuit approved the “good moral character” requirement:

From our report: Second Circuit’s Partial Upholding of New York’s Gun Carry Law Appealed to SCOTUS:

    The key part of the Petition [asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case] is its discussion of the New York law’s requirement that New Yorkers prove that they have “good moral character” before obtaining a concealed carry permit:

        [T]his case would allow this Court the opportunity to clarify that government may not selectively disarm law-abiding members of “the people” whenever licensing officials feel they are of poor character, potentially dangerous, or otherwise unworthy of enjoying the natural right to self-defense with which they were endowed by their Creator….

-----

Rhode Island Magazine Limit Law

For example, as reported in the Second Amendment advocacy website The Reload, a Federal Appeals Court recently upheld a Rhode Island ammo magazine ban:

    Rhode Island’s ban on possessing ammunition magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds doesn’t violate the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court ruled on Friday [March 8, 2024].

    A three-judge panel for the First Circuit Court of Appeals [which covers Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island] unanimously upheld a lower court’s denial of a motion for preliminary injunction against Rhode Island’s magazine ban. The panel did so after ruling that “large capacity magazines” (LCMs) are rarely used in self-defense, and the state’s ban imposes “no meaningful burden” on Rhode Islanders’ ability to defend themselves. It also held the magazine ban was relevantly similar to historical gun restrictions, as required by the Supreme Court’s test in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen….-----

Illinois “Assault Weapon” Ban and Magazine Limit Law

There is also a case challenging an Illinois law banning certain “assault rifles” and also imposing a magazine limit: Seventh Circuit Upholds Illinois ‘Assault Weapon,’ Magazine Bans:

    Illinois and several of its localities can continue to enforce their bans on AR-15s and other semi-automatic weapons, a federal appeals court ruled Friday [November 3, 2023].

    A three-judge panel for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a lower court decision blocking the gun bans after finding that the state and local governments “have a strong likelihood of success” in defending the law on constitutional grounds. In a 2-1 decision, the judges said that semi-automatic AR-15s and the magazines that come standard with them are not “arms” protected by the Second Amendment because they are “indistinguishable” from fully-automatic machineguns like the M16….-----

Delaware “Assault Weapon” Ban and Magazine Limit Law

Three cases winding their way through the Delaware federal court were just argued at the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (which covers New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware).

On Monday, March 11, 2024, the Third Circuit heard oral argument in Delaware State Sportsmens Association Inc, et al v. Delaware Department of Safety and Homeland Security (Nos. 23-1633, 23-1634, and 23-1641), where the Plaintiff/Appellants argued, in a key paragraph:

    As a matter of plain text, the Second Amendment extends to “all instruments that constitute bearable arms,” Bruen, 142 S. Ct. at 2132; i.e., “any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another,” Heller, 554 U.S. at 581. As a matter of history, Heller and Bruen establish that the only exception to this broadly protective amendment, is that arms that are “dangerous and unusual” are not protected. However, if an arm is “in common use” then it is, by definition, not dangerous and unusual. In this case, that is dispositive and the State and the district court’s arguments to the contrary, including the argument that these arms, which are chosen by millions of Americans for the purpose of self-defense, are by their nature ill-suited to that purpose, are irrelevant and should be disregarded.-----

Connecticut “Assault Weapon” Ban and Magazine Limit Law

In August of last year a federal judge in Connecticut, Senior District Court Judge Janet Bond Arterton, upheld Connecticut’s restrictive “assault weapons” ban and magazine limits: Federal Judge Upholds Connecticut ‘Assault Weapon,’ Magazine Bans:

    The Second Amendment does not protect AR-15s and ammunition magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds, a federal judge ruled on Thursday.-----

Washington State “Assault Weapon” Ban and Magazine Limit Law

In June and September of last year, a federal judge in Washington, as in Connecticut, upheld laws similar to Connecticut’s banning certain so-called “assault weapons” and placing limits on ammo rounds carried in handgun magazines: Federal Judge Upholds Washington Ammo Magazine Ban:

    Washington state can continue to enforce its ban on the sale of commonly owned ammunition magazines, a federal judge ruled Monday.-- ---

Oregon Magazine Limit and Carry Permitting Law

From The Reload: Federal Judge Rules Oregon Magazine Ban, Gun-Purchase Permitting Constitutional:

    A federal judge has ruled Oregon’s controversially strict gun-control law constitutional.

    On Friday [July 14, 2023], District Judge Karin Immergut ruled that Measure 114’s ban on large-capacity magazines and permit requirement to purchase a firearm does not violate the Second Amendment.- ----

Summary

As you can see, numerous cases are either at the U.S. Supreme Court requesting review, or are likely to end up there.

Whether the Court grants review in any of these cases might individually be a longshot, but sooner or later the Court will have to take notice of the sheer volume of these cases and provide further guidance.

We will keep you updated.

More: https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/03/groundswell-of-second-amendment-cases-seems-destined-for-the-supreme-court/