Quantcast
Connect with us

NRA defeated as Supreme Court rejects challenge to Chicago suburb’s assault weapon ban

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a challenge by gun rights activists to a Chicago suburb’s ordinance banning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, handing a victory to gun control advocates amid a fierce debate over the nation’s firearms laws.

The 2013 ordinance passed by the city of Highland Park, Illinois will remain in place. By opting not to hear an appeal of a lower-court ruling that upheld the measure, the justices declined to take up what would have been a high-profile gun rights case following a succession of mass shootings including the one last week in San Bernardino, California.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Highland Park measure bans various semi-automatic weapons, including well-known guns such as the AR-15 and AK-47, in addition to magazines holding more than 10 rounds of bullets.

Two conservatives on the nine-member court, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, said the justices should have taken the case.

Thomas wrote a six-page dissent in which he said that despite recent pro-gun rights rulings by the conservative-leaning high court, several lower courts “have upheld categorical bans on firearms that millions of Americans commonly own for lawful purposes.”

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Semi-automatic rifles are popular, with the vast majority of owners using them for lawful purposes, Thomas said. “Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons,” he said.

‘A SECOND-CLASS RIGHT’

In April, the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the challenge to Highland Park’s ordinance. Thomas said the high court should have heard the appeal of that ruling in order to prevent that appeals court “from relegating the Second Amendment to a second-class right.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The plaintiffs were gun owner Arie Friedman, a pediatrician, and the Illinois State Rifle Association. The National Rifle Association, the influential gun rights group, and 24 U.S. states urged the high court to hear the case.

The Supreme Court has not taken up a major gun case since 2010. In the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case, the court held for the first time that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual right to bear arms, but the ruling applied only to firearms kept in the home for self-defense. Two years later, in the case McDonald v. City of Chicago, the court held that the earlier ruling applied to the states.

In defending the ban, Highland Park’s lawyers noted that it was enacted “following a series of tragic mass shootings across the nation” including the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut in which 20 young pupils and six adults were killed.

ADVERTISEMENT

They also pointed out that seven states, including California and New York, have similar laws on the books.

A nationwide assault weapons ban law expired in 2004 when the bitterly divided U.S. Congress failed to renew it, with many Republicans opposing gun control measures. The federal law had barred the manufacture and sale of semi-automatic guns with military-style features as well as magazines holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

In his speech to the nation on Sunday night, President Barack Obama noted that the husband-and-wife shooters who killed 14 people in San Bernardino had stockpiled assault weapons and ammunition. Obama called for new limits on assault weapons.

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Right-wingers have a full-blown freakout over Kavanaugh revelations — and it could blow up in their faces

Published

on

Do Republicans think “men are the real victims of sexism” is a winning argument going into the 2020 election? That sounds preposterous, but there are strong indications that Donald Trump and other leading Republicans believe they can win by feeding a “victim mentality” in men, a mentality they otherwise tend to decry when detected in actual victims.

On Sunday, the New York Times published an article by the authors of a new book about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, introducing more corroborating evidence for claims that Kavanaugh had a history throughout high school and college of getting trashed and then sexually abusing his female classmates. That story, almost a year after Kavanaugh’s momentous confirmation hearings, was interesting further evidence that Kavanaugh likely perjured himself before the Senate. Ultimately, it doesn’t really change anything, since there’s little reason to believe that anyone actually believed Kavanaugh was telling the truth at the time.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

WATCH: Lewandowski’s lawyer freaks out, tries to block Congress from asking any further questions

Published

on

During the House Judiciary Committee testimony of President Donald Trump's former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski about the Russia investigation, Lewandowski's attorney frantically crashed the witness table and demanded that Congress stop asking questions of his client.

"Mister Chairman, as you know I am counsel for Mr. Lewandowski—" began the attorney.

"You are not a witness and you should not be seated at that table," cut in House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) sharply.

"I understand that," said Lewandowski's attorney. "I will leave after I register a formal protest based upon the debate that I heard. These seem to be unauthorized questions and I know you choose your words carefully—"

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Lewandowski’s testimony will let Democrats build Nixon-like articles of impeachment: Ex-prosecutor

Published

on

As President Donald Trump's former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski combatively testified before the House Judiciary Committee, he admitted that Trump asked him to communicate to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions that former special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation must be shut down. Aside from that revelation, most of the testimony was unproductive, with Lewandowski lashing out at members of Congress and running interference for the president.

But as former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti wrote on Twitter, these outbursts — and the fact that Trump sanctioned the way that Lewandowski behaved in the hearing — could be the basis for Democrats to write up articles of impeachment against Trump similar to those drafted against Richard Nixon in 1974:

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free.
close-image