We recently reported that the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear two cases related to the Second Amendment—one challenging Delaware’s ban on so-called “assault weapons” and “high-capacity” magazines, and the other targeting Maryland’s handgun licensing requirements.
To most gun-rights activists, the decision to not consider those cases was a disappointing one, as both Delaware’s ban and Maryland’s licensing requirements are arguably unconstitutional, especially when considering the criteria set down in the 2022 Bruen ruling.
However, not everything Second Amendment-related coming out of SCOTUS lately has been negative. According to a report at theindependent.org, two such cases were recently relisted for the court to again consider whether it will hear the cases.
The first case is Snope v. Brown, which also contests Maryland’s ban on semi-automatic rifles that are commonly used. In a brief urging the Supreme Court to consider the case, the National Rifle Association (NRA) succinctly summarized the appellant’s arguments.
“The Heller Court applied the text-and-history test later expounded in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen (2022),” the brief stated. “Analyzing the Second Amendment’s plain text, Heller determined that the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all bearable arms. Proceeding to our nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, Heller held that only ‘dangerous and unusual’ arms may be banned, and because common arms are not unusual, a ban on common arms violates the Second Amendment. Under Heller, this case is simple: Because Maryland bans common semiautomatic rifles— including the most popular rifle in America—the ban violates the Second Amendment.”
It’s easy to demonstrate how commonly used AR-15s and other modern semi-automatic sporting rifles are. According to a recent report from the NSSF, American citizens own over 30 million of these rifles, making the argument that they are “not in common use” quite weak.
Ultimately, in its petition, the NRA asked the court to grant the Petition for Certiorari to “reaffirm its precedents and restore the right of Americans to possess common weapons.”
The other case is Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island, which asks whether a confiscatory ban on the possession of magazines that are in common use violates the Second Amendment.
In a brief filed asking the Supreme Court to consider this matter, the NSSF used a similar argument to that used in the “assault weapons” ban case.
“In District of Columbia v. Heller, this Court established a clear constitutional rule: If an arm is in common use for lawful purposes by the American people, then an ‘absolute prohibition’ is simply ‘off the table’ for the government,” the brief argued. “In the years since, Justices Thomas, Alito, and then-Judge Kavanaugh have all expressly affirmed that Heller meant what it said: If an arm is in lawful common use, it cannot be totally banned—full stop. That should make this an easy case. What Rhode Island calls ‘large-capacity magazines’ (LCMs)—those that hold more than 10 rounds—are in reality ordinary magazines that are a standard component of the country’s most popular firearms. They are in lawful and common use—i.e., they are ‘typically possessed’—by millions of law-abiding Americans seeking to defend themselves, their families and their communities.”
It remains to be seen whether the Supreme Court will agree to hear either of these cases. But at some point, it needs to weigh in once and for all on the many unconstitutional laws banning semi-auto rifles and normal-capacity magazines being passed regularly by lawmakers in less gun-friendly states.
Are the two cases complete, with no appeals left?
Yes. In fact Snope was up before but was reversed and remanded for further consideration in light of Bruen. The Circuit Court remanded to the trial court to review to see if there was similar restraints within the appropriate period, it was appealed to the Third DCA, which ultimately confirmed its earlier decision (yes, the one that was reversed) that the ban is constitutional.
Remember that about 4000 cases are appealed to SCOTUS every year, and their schedule will only allow for about 80 (which is about two per week during their 9-month session), so it’s a simple truth that most will be declined. It’s just math and reality.
Aggravates me that the SC gives itself so much time out of session. Which other government agency is allowed such?
Yes, SC justices are simply govt employees, else their salaries and benefits would not be funded through the US treasury.
“their salaries and benefits“
Not all of their ‘benefits’ come from the US treasury:
“Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas accepted gifts worth millions of dollars over 20 years, analysis finds
PUBLISHED THU, JUN 6 2024 5:49 PM EDT
Gabriel Cortés
@GABECORTES
Kevin Breuninger
@KEVINWILLIAMB“
Now do one about hunter biden and his percents for the big guy.
Not capable of being unbiased?
Good for him, I hope he’s enjoying them. There’s nothing wrong with having rich friends. All of the Justices have received gifts. So what? None of the giftees have come before then in a case so it doesn’t matter.
to be fair, of the cases rejected some were in a status that were not ready for SCOTUS as they like them.
Piss on commonly used.
All that book learning and the judges that are supposed to protect our Constitution do not know what Shall Not Be Infringed means
I want a Buck Roger’s Space Blaster too.
Xdduly elected official,
Judges know full well what the Second Amendment means–they simply refuse to uphold it when they do not uphold it.
This isn’t a knowledge or understanding problem–it is a willful refusal problem.
Not so fast grasshopper…Courts know what the 2A means because it has been dissected down to the nano level. The problem is stage frightened 2A attorneys fail to inform courts a Constitutional Right is up against Gun Control an agenda Historical Analogies Confrim is Rooted in Racism and Genocide. Such attorney silence does more to support Gun Control than mobs of marching misguided drama queens begging legislators for Gun Control.
Yet again you mouth off without understanding or purpose.
Why all the “hate” on D? The message is correct, new, uninformed, people come to this forum; they need education.
The gun control freaks keep hanering the same message, until it gets results (and usually does). The gun control freaks double down, and double down again, until they win. The so-called “gun rights” people are too afraid of frightning the horses. All this lawyer nonsense about how it takes time to eat an elephant. Of course a large enough calibre bullet to the head ends the elephant.
Why are all the pro-gun organizations not attacking NFA and GCA on the basis that the Second Amendment is guardian against rogue government? Why do we not shove this fact into the faces of the courts?
“Why all the “hate” on D?“
His display of anger is born of fear, he has a fear of strong, assertive women because deep down inside, he feels weak and inadequate.
Well guess DOGE took your e, Good luck with that reassignment.
Oh, so today’s evil judges who get-off on screwing people over will somehow stop screwing people over when they learn that evil police and judges of 160 years ago were screwing over black people. Got it.
Using that logic, we can tell today’s violent rapists that violent rapists of 160 years ago were shameful evil people who violated their victims. That will change the hearts and minds of today’s evil violent rapists. Or not.
Rule 13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
I want a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range
And the caliber? wars continue.
Nukes from orbit will resolve any lingering questions.
Barely have any civilization stopping power with those pea shooters. Now Lucifers Hammer that is a weapon, two intergalactic wars.
It’s the only way to be sure.
So this is how the courts will uphold the unconstitutional 1934 NFA. If common use is the standard, then automatic weapons will be banned forever. The “common use” standard also unconstitutionally restricts arms yet to be developed. The “common use” standard needs to be thrown out. The 2nd amendment makes no such distinctions in what arms are protected.
“The 2nd amendment makes no such distinctions in what arms are protected.”
But…..
The SC already ruled that “reasonable restrictions” are clearly constitutional.
Legalize Recreational Nuclear Bombs
Plasma rifles in the 40 watt range.
sharks with lasers on their heads and Jewish space lasers.
88 days.
I’ve heard the song 99 Tears but what’s 88 Days about?
“88 is a white supremacist numerical code for “Heil Hitler.” H is the eighth letter of the alphabet, so 88 = HH = Heil Hitler. One of the most common white supremacist symbols, 88 is used throughout the entire white supremacist movement, not just neo-Nazis.“
Pick a fake agency already.
It is only twenty seven words long for a reason. This cannot be hammered on enough.
Never underestimate the ability of SCOTUS to disappoint.
Roberts, Barrett, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh are more interested in protecting the image of the Court than they are in protecting our 2A rights.
It’s not a “conservative” court.
7
3
“If an arm is in common use for lawful purposes by the American people,…”
“It depends on what “is” is.”
“Common use” means use, not possession. Using a hunting rifle for a week out of each year is not common use. The infrequent number of times rifles are used in crimes means those rifles are not in common use. The infrequent number of times rifles are used in self-defense means those rifles are not in common use.
“Use” means engaged/applied to tasks for which the tool is designed. Simple possession is not “use”.
(Did I do it right? Am I on the Jumbotron? Too close, or just right?))
Oh my.
You’ve just chimpanzee screwed a lot of people out of having guns now there didn’t you.
Can something be used without possession?