Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

News

Supreme Court Ruling To End All Nationwide “Assault Weapon” & Magazine Bans Put In Motion

Supreme Court Ruling To End All Nationwide
Image Credit: United Liberty

In a recent development, multiple cases challenging state bans on so-called assault weapons are now appealing for immediate Supreme Court review. A recent YouTube video shared that these legal battles, with implications far beyond their state boundaries, have taken a pivotal step forward, driven by what many are calling a critical mistake by the state of Illinois in response to these lawsuits. Here’s the full story.

About the Case

About the Case
Image Credit: Armed Scholar YouTube Channel

The State of Illinois, like many others, has faced legal challenges to its bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. However, in a strategic move, supporters of the Second Amendment have leveraged these disputes to seek direct intervention from the nation’s highest court. The focus is now on six cases from Illinois, each petitioning for urgent Supreme Court review.

The Cases Represented

xr:d:DAGAhucmfBk:265,j:1723050254260786381,t:24033111
Image Credit: United Liberty

The cases in question include NAGR v. Naperville, Harrell v. Raoul, Barnett v. Raoul, GOA v. Raoul, Langley v. Kelly, and Herrera v. Raoul. These cases collectively represent a concerted effort to challenge Illinois’ stringent gun laws, which have long been a point of disagreement among gun rights advocates.

A Critical Error?

A Critical Error
Image Credit: Armed Scholar YouTube Channel

Anthony Miranda from Armed Scholar shared that in response to these petitions, the State of Illinois made a critical error that could shape the course of these legal battles. The state argued that rifles like the AR-15 are not arms under the Second Amendment’s text, thereby justifying their restrictions. Miranda added that this bold assertion has sparked outrage among Second Amendment defenders and legal experts alike.

The Implications of the Results

xr:d:DAGAhucmfBk:209,j:7643031670902664463,t:24032815
Image Credit: United Liberty

The implications of Illinois’ argument are profound. By contending that AR-15s and similar rifles are not considered arms, Miranda argued that the state essentially seeks to sidestep constitutional protections afforded to firearm ownership.

The Challenge

The Challenge
Image Credit: United Liberty

He added that this line of reasoning directly challenges the core principles of the Second Amendment, setting the stage for a showdown in the highest court of the land.

A Wider Trend

A Wider Trend
Image Credit: United Liberty

Miranda pointed out that Illinois’ tough stance reflects a wider trend. States are pushing the envelope with stricter gun control laws, testing how far courts will allow these restrictions to go under the Constitution. The outcome of these legal battles could have a ripple effect across the country, potentially redrawing the map on gun regulation.

The Argument

xr:d:DAGAhucmfBk:269,j:6726549440559108712,t:24033111
Image Credit: United Liberty

On the other side, Second Amendment supporters are firing back in court. They argue that lower courts, especially the Seventh Circuit, have made a critical mistake. According to them, the court wrongly equated AR-15s with military-grade weapons. This, they say, ignores clear legal history and sets a bad precedent.

Constitutionally Guaranteed Rights

xr:d:DAGAhucmfBk:285,j:1815374063805747981,t:24033115
Image Credit: United Liberty

Furthermore, supporters highlighted the widespread ownership and use of AR-15s for lawful purposes, including self-defense. They argue that these firearms are undeniably arms protected by the Second Amendment, and any attempt to categorically ban them infringes on constitutionally guaranteed rights.

This Could Backfire

xr:d:DAGAhucmfBk:283,j:146790397932102983,t:24033114
Image Credit: United Liberty

However, Miranda shared that this hardball strategy by Illinois could backfire. The Supreme Court might just throw the case back down and tell the lower court to use the correct analysis. He added that at the very least, Illinois is taking a big gamble.

Still in Process

Still in Process
Image Credit: Armed Scholar YouTube Channel

Concluding, Miranda shared that while the Illinois response strengthens the case for Supreme Court intervention, it is still unclear whether the Court will ultimately accept all six cases. One hurdle is that these lawsuits are currently at a preliminary stage, and the Supreme Court typically prefers to wait for lower courts to complete the legal process before intervening.

Share Your Thoughts

share your thought
Image Credit: United Liberty

So what do you think? How do you believe the Supreme Court should interpret the Second Amendment in the context of state bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines?

Mercedes Kelley
Written By

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

News

In a recent debate over Safe Storage laws, a Democratic State Legislature member from Minnesota, Rep. Kaohly Vang Her (DFL), made a statement that...

Start

Are you up for the challenge that stumps most U.S. citizens? Test your knowledge with these 25 intriguing questions about American history’s Colonial Period....

History

Are you up for the challenge that stumps most American citizens? Test your knowledge with these 25 intriguing questions about the Colonial Period of...

News

In a recent report by the Market Gains channel, the host shared about the issue of minimum wage in California. Just a month ago,...