Firearms Owners Against Crime
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
Institute for Legal, Legislative and Educational Action
The Supreme Court today agreed to hear a case involving domestic violence-related gun prohibitions but will leave unaddressed a key Second Amendment issue it raises. The Court granted a “[m]otion to proceed … limited to Question 1 presented by the petition” in the case of Voisine v. United States, the SCOTUS docket for its October 30 conference announced.
“At issue are the convictions of two Maine men, Stephen Voisine and William Armstrong, for violating a federal law that prohibits the possession of firearms and ammunition by individuals who have previously been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,” SCOTUSblog reports. Their essential argument is that Maine law violations can occur from conduct that is reckless instead of intentional, so that doesn’t qualify as a violation of federal law.
“Question 1” referred to in the docket means the Court is only taking on the “recklessness” question. They will not rule on whether a firearm ban due to a domestic violence conviction violated rights under the Second Amendment.
Unannounced at this writing is an even more eagerly anticipated question, whether the Court will grant cert in the case of Friedman v. City of Highland Park, a challenge to the city’s ban on militia-suitable firearms and standard capacity magazines. The docket notes the case was “DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 30, 2015” on Monday, so word of whether or not the case will be heard was expected.
Per SCOTUSblog, they “expect additional orders from today’s Conference on Monday at 9:30 a.m.”
David Codrea in his natural habitat.
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.
He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and also posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.