Supreme Court leaves state assault weapons bans in place

The Supreme Court will not challenge NY and CT state laws banning the sale and ownership of certain semi-automatic assault weapons and magazines.

In the wake of the December terrorist attack in San Bernardino, Calif., that left 14 dead, the Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to an assault weapons ban in a Chicago suburb.

Gun rights advocates have, however, repeatedly challenged existing laws, asking for the legalization of assault weapons – like the one used in the June 12 massacre at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando.

The Supreme Court’s action in the case wasn’t surprising, and is another in a line of decisions dashing the hopes of people on both sides of the gun control debate.

The U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, but there is a longstanding legal debate over its scope.

Ruling on the case of Shew v. Malloy, the Court refused to hear a case that would have struck down a CT law banning the sale and possession of a large assortment of semiautomatic rifles and large-capacity magazines. Despite a challenge to the constitutionality of this ban, SCOTUS decided not to weigh in.

Gun rights groups – the plaintiffs in Shew v. Malloy – had hoped the Supreme Court would step in to clarify the Heller decision.

Last week, Murphy spoke for 15 hours on the Senate floor in a filibuster calling for immediate action on gun safety following the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history, which took place last week in Orlando, Florida. In this case, the Court ruled, banning assault weapons can save lives. But the justices in March threw out a MA court ruling that stun guns are not covered by the Second Amendment and sent the case back to the state’s top court for further proceedings.

“This decision is a victory for common sense gun control laws in NY and across the nation”. It is a long-shot strategy, especially if the seat of the late Justice Antonin Scalia is filled by a nominee from a Democratic president. After recognizing the individual right for the first time in Heller, which covered the federal enclave of the District of Columbia, the court made clear in a subsequent case that state and local governments, like Congress, could not prohibit individual gun ownership.