SCOTUS Refuses To Hear Case On Assault Weapons Ban
December 7, 2015

Very, very good news for now. Of course, Scalia and Thomas voted to hear it:

The Supreme Court Monday declined to review the ability of cities and states to prohibit semiautomatic “assault” weapons that can carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition and have been used in some of the nation’s most deadly recent mass shootings.

The justices decided not to review a lower court’s decisions in a case from the city of Highland Park near Chicago. But seven states--Maryland, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York --have similar bans.

After deciding in District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 that the Second Amendment provides the right for an individual to keep a weapon in the home, the court has avoided all cases that might clarify if that right is more expansive.

Gun rights advocates say cities and states continue to put unreasonable restrictions on the constitutional right. But the court has not yet found a case it thinks requires its intervention. That could be because a majority of the court thinks the restrictions are legally justified, or because the court is closely divided and neither side is sure of what the outcome of taking a case might be.

By its inaction, the court has left in place lower court rulings that allow restrictions on carrying a weapon outside the home, among other things, and on the kinds of guns that can be prohibited.

Can you help us out?

For 18 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.