Supreme Court turns away challenge to state bans on assault weapons

by David G. Savage  |  published on June 21, 2016

The Supreme Court turned away another challenge to state laws banning the sale of rapid-fire assault weapons on Monday, a victory for gun control supporters at a time of heightened public concern over the issue.

Without comment or a dissent, the justices dismissed appeals from gun-rights advocates in Connecticut and New York who contended the state bans violated their rights under the 2nd Amendment.

The court’s action came as no surprise. In December, the justices had turned down a similar appeal in a case from Highland Park, Ill., but over the dissents of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

The high court’s refusal to even consider the claim that the 2nd Amendment includes the right to own a rapid-fire weapon strongly suggest the majority of justices see the Constitution’s protection of gun rights as more limited than many gun-rights advocates maintain.

  • Mys77

    Everyone is missing the point, the right to bear arms should not be infringed upon! Ownership of any and all firearms is our right! Owning a gun is not a violation of any law! The problem is when people USE that firearm, and until there is a “shot” fired, no law has been broken, the fu government is violating our constitutional right to bear arms! The idea that gun owners are guilty of a crime just for having a gun, anticipating they will break the law, that is ludicrous! Government needs to stop being control freaks!

    • original ancestry

      Well said…

  • Bobby Hopkins

    king o has something on them with roberts the most.

  • Snoopy

    THEY do NOT know what an ASSAULT weapon IS!!!

  • Wolfman

    The Justices are only supposed to INTERPRET the Constitution. The least they could do, in their legal/non-political role as being ‘blind’, is show us how the phrase ‘ SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED’ actually means ” they can be infringed anyway the states want”?????

    • Bobby Hopkins

      no intertreptation.the conststion is pretty clear and dogmatic about the 2nd ammendant especally and the bill of rights in general.

  • Timothy Thompson

    This court is as useless as our President, Scalia more than likely was assasinated you don’t hear much about that anymore. With Ginsberg and her leftest associates if one more leftest gets on the court we might as well just pack it in, the executive, along with the SCOTUS help will abolish our freedom and liberty.

    • Bobby Hopkins

      i firmely believe he was murdered.

  • ADRoberts

    God help us. You are the only one who can change their corrupted mind or remove them from the land of the living.
    I ask in Jesus Name and in Your Will, Amen.

  • Mr. Geezer

    This only proves the Justices on the Supreme Court not only wear black robes but black hats as well.

    • bobnstuff

      It proves that things don’t change, they have found on the gun control side over and over but the great minds on AM radio know more then they do about what the constitution means, Even conservative justices have supported limited gun control.

      • Rodney Steward

        That’s why it’s called the Constitution! DO NOT TOUCH!!

        • bobnstuff

          That’s why it’s called the framework of democracy. It’s something we build on.

          • original ancestry

            Based on the Constitution only. Supreme Foundation of U.S. Laws…

        • David Tierney

          It is sort of funny how people do not want anyone to change the Constitution but want to re-write the Constitution concerning SCOTUS or whichever issue they do not like. They can’t have it both ways. Just leave the Constitution alone or we are totally screwed just as we will be if Hillary wins. Thank God the Republicans have a majority in Congress, albeit, for the time being.

      • HENRI


Google Analytics Alternative