NRA Statement on Peruta v. California Denial Of Petition by SCOTUS

Court Gavel
NRA Statement on Peruta v. California Denial Of Petition by SCOTUS
National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)
National Rifle Association Institute For Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

Fairfax, VA – -( The executive director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement Monday regarding the United States Supreme Court’s denial of petition in the case of Peruta v. California:

“We are disappointed in the Court’s rejection of the appeal in Peruta v. California, which now leaves millions of law-abiding Californians with no ability to bear arms outside the home. As Justices Thomas and Gorsuch correctly stated, too many courts have been treating the Second Amendment as a second-class right. That should not be allowed to stand. As the Supreme Court stated in its landmark decision in Heller v. District of Columbia, the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.”

“The framers of our Constitution did not intend to limit that right to the home. We look forward to a future Court affirming that the right to keep and bear arms is as much a part of our Constitution as the other enumerated rights that it protects. We will not stop fighting until a future Court affirms this fundamental right.”


About National Rifle Association:

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. More than five million members strong, NRA continues to uphold the Second Amendment and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services. Follow the NRA on social at and Twitter @NRA. Visit:

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dan Schwager

This is what happen’s when you VOTE for Democrats.

Ron Ashley

Some savvy pro-gun advocate or organization should pursue the larger Constitutional argument that the reason the 2d Amendment was to codified was to protect citizens’ right and ability to “fight tyranny,” or as Heller stated it, “to oppose an oppressive military force if the constitutional order broke down.” In other words, if the government becomes tyrannical, the People may have to fight their own government’s troops someday. That being the case, no government, state or federal, has a right to give itself an advantage in any such confrontation by barring citizens from purchasing hand-carried arms that are equally as effective… Read more »


Prior to this, the Supreme Court also refused to hear the petition from Connecticut and Massachusetts gun groups asking it to review the clearly unconstitutional gun law which included an assault weapon ban, ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds, and a large list of firearms banned by name. It is not looking good for the future of gun ownership.

Silence Dogood

Another sad example of the NRA chiming in too late, with too little.

Dr. Strangelove

I believe that the NRA filed an amicus brief in the Peruta case. If they had taken the case and Kennedy went with the libtards, it would have set a bad precedent.