Quantcast

Supreme Court REFUSES to Hear Gun Rights Cases

Screen Shot 2014-02-24 at 1.22.33 PM

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to wade into the politically volatile issue of gun control by leaving intact three court rulings rejecting challenges to federal and state laws.

The court’s decision not to hear the cases represented a loss for gun rights advocates, including the National Rifle Association, which was behind two of the challenges.

The first case involved a challenge by the NRA to a Texas law that prevents 18-20 year olds from carrying handguns in public. It also raised the broader question of whether there is a broad right under the Second Amendment to bear arms in public.

The second NRA case was a challenge to several federal laws and regulations, dating back to 1968, that make it illegal for firearms dealers to sell guns or ammunition to anyone under 21.

The third case was on the narrow question of whether consumers have the legal right to challenge laws that regulate the sale of firearms. The challenge to a federal law that restricts the interstate transport of guns, and a related Virginia law, were filed by several District of Columbia residents who wished to obtain guns via neighboring Virginia.

The court has yet to decide whether there is a right to carry guns in public, a question left unanswered in its two most recent gun-related decisions.

In the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case, the court held that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guaranteed an individual right to bear arms. Two years later in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the court held that the earlier ruling applied to the states.

Read more at Reuters

Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • ZeroDarkThirty

    Gotta love it when those charged with upholding Constitutional law are too pansy to actually do their job? Sounds like they care more about keeping their jobs than actually doing it. Time to fire all these bench warmers and put some people with more testicular fortitude in their place.

    • Jim Sanders

      Amen to that conclusion. To many that owe Obama so they keep their silence until he needs something. What are they being paid for if not doing their job?

    • ADRoberts

      If you fire them now, Obama with the aide of Reid, McConnell, McCain and Graham will just put in judges who are MORE UNAMERICAN and tyrannical.

  • Americans Wake Up

    Time to put some people on the court that are actually Patriots. We are stepping all over the Constitution in the name of political correctness and the SCOTUS is too wimpy to stand up for what’s right.

  • ALICIA LUTZ-ROLOW / OATHKEEPER

    WHO DO THOSE JUDGES THINK THEY ARE…AND WHY IN THE WORLD IS THE 2ND AMENDMENT ON TRIAL? THE 2ND AMENDMENT IS THE LAW OF THIS LAND…IT IS NOT UP FOR INFRINGEMENT OR DEBATE!!! WTHU AMERICA….STOP ALLOWING THE 2ND AMENDMENT TO BE DEBATED…IT’S NOT UP FOR DISCUSSION….IT’S THE LAW!!!

    • jkrzos

      YES!!!!!! You hit the nail on the head. You go girl
      fellowoathkeepper

    • Myrtle Linder

      Who do those judges think they are??? Well, we can’t have but one god and you certainly can’t call them angels, they don’t fit my idea of angels, at least. Does Satan have angels???.

      • ADRoberts

        Yes but they are called demons. (They frequently look like liberal women.)

    • skptk

      Calm down. If “It’s the law, so it’s not up for debate” were a valid argument, we would have to shut up about the repeal of Obamacare. In fact, even any part of the Constitution is open for debate – that’s why the amendment process is in there. If it were’nt, there wouldn’t be a Second “Amendment”.

      • Larry

        Ocare is not part of our Constitution, 2nd Amendment sure is. What bothers me about the whole thing is, why are there any gun laws in the first place; the 2nd Amendment is clear, and shall not infringe. For almost 150 years we had no gun laws, not until FDR tried to enlarge the Supreme Court and the first law was passed Since then, we have had nothing but problems. The gun laws began about the time that the progressives showed up on the scene and Christians thought that politics was dirty and quit participating in the debate. If we had stayed engaged, we would not have the mess we have in our country today.

    • ADRoberts

      “When in the course of human events………………”
      (You know the rest of the statement)

    • Bob Howell

      The 2nd amendment is my right to bear arms.

  • Brian P.

    Who cares if the issue is politically divisive. The Supreme Court exists for ONE purpose, to overturn un-Constitutional laws. They have life term on the courts so they don’t have to worry about politics. Cowards!!!!!

    • Wayne Ogilvy

      When was the last time those bustards over turned any un-constitutional laws ? Maybe it’s time for their terms to be based on FOLLOWING the supreme law of the land ! One vote against , Last time you vote and jail time !!

  • Darkskor

    Sorry ZeroDarkThirty, unless we catch them in bed with a live boy or a did girl, we can’t fire any of them, lifetime appointment. However, there are more of us with firearms than there are those trying to take them away. I for one don’t care what laws they bring up, when guns are outlawed, this OUTLAW will still have his gun. If any gun grabber is foolish enough to came after my gun, they will find themselves with a SEVERE case of lead poisoning. Take heart in knowing that the Patriots in this country WILL stand and fight when push comes to shove….btw, just love your handle….

    • USAPatriotSC

      The People can remove any part or all of the Government if they choose to. The only life appointment in this Country is Patriotism!

  • Myrtle Linder

    Fire the Supreme Court! They do not seem to be doing anything, but collecting salaries. and toadying to the liberals.

  • JustAVet

    I’m glad Supreme Court didn’t hear the cases regarding state laws. Constitution limits federal government only. If we allow Supreme/federal Courts to hear/rule on cases concerning state laws, we are setting ourselves up for an even more tyrannical central gov’t (definitely not what our founders had in mind). states and cities can pass any law they want (and voters approve of). time for us to wake up & stop the creeping federal gov’t powers.

  • LarryD2

    The right to bear arms is a natural right not one that is given to us by the Constitution or by the states. The 2nd amendment warns the government to keep hands off. Neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights permits the government to legislate, infringe or control our access to and use of arms. The 2nd amendment is not designed to give us what is rightfully ours.
    The right to protect ourselves from those who would do us harm, from an out-of-control government or to feed ourselves is a God given right. Those who challenge the 2nd amendment are attempting to cloud the issue and gain control over the people.
    Read the Preamble to the Bill of Rights (it does have one although you may have to look for it). The Declaration of Independence is also a good source because a significant portion of the Constitution was influenced by it.

  • A Constitutional Republic 1st

    The SCOTUS does not hear EVERY case. Thousands upon thousands of cases are appealed there each year and literally a handful are decided. The questions presented are normally ones which have not been clarified before or decided before. Sometimes, the highest Court, in its Constitutional function, must evaluate cases that come forward and reject those which will not allow it to speak clearly and firmly on an issue, particularly a constitutional right. So time is not always of the essence with the Supreme Court, and well reasoned, deliberate analysis combined with a respect for the Rights of the People, looking forward, often win the day. Be patient, the Court will get it right, and the Second Amendment and Liberty over Tyranny will always PREVAIL! Have a little faith, and don’t forget that the founders were not ashamed to pray! Seek knowledge, widom and guidance for yourselves, and for those who are now in power in government, including at the Supreme Court of the United States. The case will come before them which will allow for the kinds of bright line analysis and decisionmaking like in Heller and its progeny. They are very aware of their pledge to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, for freedom, for liberty and for equal justice under the law. No entity is perfect, but you will see these honored justices are waiting for the appropriate case and the appropriate time to SPEAK!

  • ADRoberts

    This refusal to hear these cases is the SAME as deciding against guns rights. These cowards KNOW that the Constitution does not allow any INFRINGEMENTS. So rather than address the issues, they just close their eyes and refuse to do their jobs. Thereby, they leave the lower, liberal courts’ rulings in place which means that they HAVE ruled against the Second Amendment.
    Impeach them NOW. But not until you impeach Obama, Biden, Boehner, Reid, McConnell and Pelosi

  • blackhawk132

    Answer term limits or at least required age limits. God help us if Obama gets to appoint another liberal judge to replace a conservative one. 1970’s all over again.

  • SFS444

    It is time to get rid of this Supreme Court because the contract with America which is the Constitution is being broken illegally repeatedly. The Supreme Court just like Congress are too scared to make a move that will start a an up rise. We as states need to take it upon ourselves to enforce the Constitution and not let one entity like the Supreme Court have all power of final say anyway. The same goes for impeaching this illegal muslim in the white house. It is time and the Egyptian s and Ukrainians show us the way. However we can do it better.