Democrats in state legislatures across the country are salivating at the opportunity to pass gun control.
Illinois enacted a so-called “assault weapons” ban earlier this month, with Democrats in New Mexico and Colorado looking to soon follow suit.
While states like California and Massachusetts have had these bans on the books for years, Democrats are now pushing restrictive gun control much more aggressively in states that have historically rejected them.
In the wake of the Supreme Court Bruen decision last summer, Democrats and their financiers in the gun control lobby are looking to see how far they can push the new boundaries set for anti-gun restrictions.
The Bruen decision was groundbreaking not only because of the initial effects of the ruling knocking down New York City’s ridiculous permitting system, but also because of its potential to strike down gun control regimes coast-to-coast.
The Bruen decision was groundbreaking not only because of the initial effects of the ruling knocking down New York City’s ridiculous permitting system, but also because of its potential to strike down gun control regimes coast-to-coast. In forcing lower courts to interpret the Second Amendment in accordance with the history, text and tradition in which the Amendment was drafted, very few gun control laws should survive.
Late last year the National Association for Gun Rights’ legal arm filed seven lawsuits against states and municipalities with gun bans and several lawsuits have already been filed against Illinois’ recently passed law.
While gun rights advocates are feeling confident about how these rulings could turn out, it could take years before any ruling of substance is handed down, which is why Democrats are so bullish on passing as many radical gun control laws as possible. Pass it while they can and let the courts figure it out.
As we have seen with the Supreme Court’s measured approach to dealing with New York state’s open defiance of the Bruen decision, it doesn’t seem likely that they are going to jump the gun on the legal challenges to bans on “assault weapons.”
As we have seen with the Supreme Court’s measured approach to dealing with New York state’s open defiance of the Bruen decision, it doesn’t seem likely that they are going to jump the gun on the legal challenges to bans on “assault weapons.”
But assuming nothing changes on the Supreme Court, we could potentially see gun bans and other firearms restrictions struck down in the next couple years.
While Bruen did not go as far as some of us in the gun rights community would have liked, it did open a wide door for most anti-gun restrictions on the books at the federal and state level to be struck down. That is, of course, if the Court remains in the hands of conservatives who are willing to use their position to restore constitutional order in our nation.
The fact that gun restrictions must be measured against the text, history and tradition of the Second Amendment should lead to the striking down of so-called “assault weapons” bans, firearms registration, the federal background check system and more.
But until then, the gun rights community must resist the temptation to put all of our hope in the Supreme Court. The fact is Democrats (and some Republicans) are going to try to pass the most restrictive gun control possible. . .
In late December, New York State Supreme Court Judge Thomas Moran even used the Bruen decision to strike down the state’s “Red Flag” law, arguing that based on history the law lacks “the necessary constitutional safeguards or guarantees to protect a person” subject to a “Red Flag” order.
So there is a glimmer of hope on the horizon for gun owners even in the most anti-gun bastions of America. We have yet to see the full fruit of the Bruen decision and it could just be a matter of time until these schemes start falling like dominoes.
But until then, the gun rights community must resist the temptation to put all of our hope in the Supreme Court. The fact is Democrats (and some Republicans) are going to try to pass the most restrictive gun control possible and, if successful, will trample on the rights of millions of Americans. It is far better to stop these restrictions before they become law than to rely on the courts system to strike them down. Yes, use the courts if necessary, but first fight to kill the bills in the legislature.
