The appeals court concluded that the government had failed to show that policy is consistent with "this Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."
The same newspaper notes that the killer "obtained a firearm legally," which means he was never "committed" to a mental health institution.
Kathy Hochul's focus on "assault weapons" is puzzling, since the perpetrator easily could have killed the same number of people with a gun that did not fall into that politically defined category.
Golden State ammunition restrictions have been voided for violating the Second Amendment.
The contrast between the two cases illustrates the haphazard impact of an arbitrary, constitutionally dubious gun law.
In response to a Second Amendment lawsuit, the government says the restriction "serves legitimate objectives" and "only modestly burdens" the right to arms.
The taxes on sound suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and short-barreled shotguns, originally enacted in 1934, were meant to be prohibitive, imposing bans in the guise of raising revenue.
Democratic critics of the new program overlook the injustice of permanently disarming Americans who pose no threat to public safety.
The appeals court concluded that the restriction impinges on the right to arms and is not consistent with the historical tradition of firearm regulation.
Long restricted by federal law, suppressors are poised to be freed by litigation or legislation.
Melynda Vincent is asking the justices to decide whether it's constitutional to disarm people based on nothing more than a nonviolent criminal conviction.
The state may have a hard time showing that its broad restrictions are consistent with the "historical tradition of firearm regulation."
The movie star’s special treatment highlights the injustice of an illogical federal law.
A new Justice Department rule could help "prohibited persons" who pose no threat to public safety.
Millions of people are barred from owning firearms even though they have no history of violence, and they have essentially no recourse under current law.
The Supreme Court will decide whether this threat to the Second Amendment is legally viable.
The government failed to persuade the appeals court that 18-to-20-year-olds are not part of "the people" or that the age restriction is consistent with the "historical tradition of firearm regulation."
The president-elect lost his Second Amendment rights thanks to a nonsensical gun ban.
Joanne Eisen and Paul Gallant advanced human rights globally by telling the stories of the victims of oppression
Patrick Darnell Daniels Jr. was sentenced to nearly four years in prison for violating a federal law that bars drug users from owning firearms.
Gabriel Metcalf argues that his prosecution under the Gun-Free School Zones Act violated his constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
The draconian penalties that Hunter Biden escaped affect many people whose fathers cannot save them.
Joe Biden says his son did not deserve prison for violating firearm laws that the president vigorously defends and has made more severe.
U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn says the law bans firearms covered by the Second Amendment and is not supported by historical precedent.
The Supreme Court is considering whether a rule targeting "ghost guns" exceeds the agency's statutory authority.
The ruling says some restrictions on guns in "sensitive places" are constitutionally dubious but upholds several others.
The case is another example of stretching criminal laws to hold parents accountable for their children's violence.
The ruling concludes that the government failed to show an Illinois ban is "consistent with this Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."
The 2024 Democratic platform devotes five paragraphs to firearm restrictions but does not even allude to the Second Amendment.
Does the Second Amendment allow the government to ban guns in common use for lawful purposes?
The decision shows that the Supreme Court has forced judges who like gun control to respect the Second Amendment anyway.
Gov. Janet Mills’s office referred critical social media posts to the police. The FPC pushed back.
Defending the federal ban on gun possession by drug users, the government's lawyers seem increasingly desperate.
The party's neglect of the issue is consistent with its domination by Donald Trump, who pays lip service to the Second Amendment but has never been a true believer.
Although the FBI never produced evidence that Ali Hemani was a threat to national security, it seems determined to imprison him by any means necessary.
Although critics say the Court’s current approach is unworkable, it has been undeniably effective at defeating constitutionally dubious gun regulations.
The Court says "a credible threat" justifies a ban on gun possession but does not address situations where there is no such judicial finding.
The case hinged on the ATF’s statutory authority, not the Second Amendment.
Six justices agreed that federal regulators had misconstrued the statutory definition of a machine gun.
The president's son, who faces up to 25 years in prison for conduct that violated no one's rights, can still challenge his prosecution on Second Amendment grounds.
Their cases illustrate the injustice of taking away people’s Second Amendment rights based on nonviolent crimes
The president's son, who is charged with crimes that violated no one's rights, theoretically faces up to 25 years in prison.
The former president's loss of his Second Amendment rights highlights an arbitrary restriction that applies to many people with no history of violence.
The state's gun permit policy underlines the absurdity of assuming that cannabis consumers are too dangerous to be trusted with firearms.
Without providing any evidence, the paper says "loosened restrictions on firearms" contributed to gun violence in Columbus.
Likening drug users to people who are "mentally ill and dangerous," the ruling says barring them from owning firearms is not unconstitutional on its face.
Lower courts have been extremely skeptical of attempts to regulate unfinished parts as firearms.
