US Supreme Court Gives Nod to Assault Weapons Ban

“Because the Second Amendment confers rights upon individual citizens – not state governments – it was doubly wrong for the (federal appeals court) to delegate to States and localities the power to decide which firearms people may possess”, the dissent by Thomas and Scalia states.

The two conservative justices on the nine-member court dissented and wanted to take the case.

Specifically, Highland Park’s ordinance banned assault weapons, as well as ammunition magazines that can hold more than ten rounds.

The justices left room in the 2010 ruling for gun ownership restrictions, stating that their decision extending Second Amendment rights to states “does not imperil every law regulating firearms”.

The high court has considered taking on the case for two months, and a delay in deciding whether to take it on seems to be because Justice Clarence Thomas was finishing his opinion. “Because noncompliance with our Second Amendment precedents warrants this Court’s attention as much as any of our precedents, I would grant certiorari in this case”, Thomas added. “The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting”, Thomas wrote.

In October, the federal appeals court in NY largely upheld similar laws in CT and NY, among a handful of states that ban semi-automatic weapons. The law bans assault weapons of the type that fires one shot with each pull of the trigger (a semi-automatic weapon, in contrast to a repeating machine gun).

The court’s only two previous decisions upholding gun rights struck down city ordinances in Chicago and Washington, D.C., that prohibited residents from keeping a handgun at home for self-defense. You could make the argument that we’ve won. We have a good foundation for successful Second Amendment advocacy. They argued the weapons affected, including the AR-15, were among the most popular guns sold in this country.

If you listen to the National Rifle Association, you’ll learn that the right to bear arms is not only the most important of all rights – more so than the right to free speech or free exercise of religion, they say, because an armed citizenry is what guarantees all the other rights – it’s also a right that exists virtually without limit. Judge Frank Easterbrook said the courts should defer to city and state officials who seek to protect the public’s safety. “The Supreme Court recognizes that there are certain categories of guns that do not fall within the protections of the Second Amendment”, Elrod said. Highland Park was one of fewer than 20 municipalities, all in the Chicago area, to enact regulations or bans, according to the rifle association.

“It’s only a matter of time before the Supreme Court takes a case, sets things straight, and properly subjects this and similar unconstitutional laws to renewed challenge”, said Chuck Michel, a lawyer who filed a brief on behalf of the NRA.

On Monday, the high court refused to hear a Second Amendment challenge to a 2013 ordinance passed by the city of Highland Park, Illinois, without giving reason.