Recently, the Supreme Court made a significant move by refusing to hear any new Second Amendment cases, leaving many gun rights advocates wondering about the implications. Here’s a breakdown of what happened and what it means for the future of Second Amendment litigations, based on Mark Smith’s analysis from Four Boxes Diner.
Supreme Court’s Recent Decisions
The Supreme Court issued an “Order List” denying hearings on all cases that could be impacted by the recent Rahimi ruling regarding prohibited persons and sending back all the 922(g) cases to lower courts for further consideration. While this may seem like a setback, Smith believes it’s not necessarily bad news. He highlights that these decisions are part of a larger strategy by the Court.
Understanding the 922(g) Cases
The 922(g) cases involve individuals prohibited from possessing firearms due to factors like illegal drug use or felony convictions. The Supreme Court’s decision in Rahimi played a crucial role here. The Court vacated the lower court orders and sent them back for reconsideration in light of Rahimi. This decision emphasized the importance of assessing whether someone is a violent danger before disarming them rather than a blanket prohibition based on past felonies or other factors.
Strategic Implications
Smith points out that while the 922(g) cases are important, they might not be the best cases to push forward for the Second Amendment community right now. The reason is strategic: cases involving non-violent individuals with clean records are more likely to gain sympathy and favorable rulings compared to those involving convicted criminals or drug users.
Semi-Automatic Rifle Ban Cases
The denial to hear the semi-automatic rifle ban cases from Illinois was expected by Smith. He explains that these cases were interlocutory, meaning they hadn’t reached a final judgment. The Supreme Court prefers to make decisions based on complete records, avoiding premature rulings. Smith also mentions the lack of a circuit split on this issue as another reason for the Court’s decision.
Future Second Amendment Cases
Looking ahead, Smith predicts that there will be significant Second Amendment cases in the 2024-2025 term. One likely candidate is a case, which deals with the rights of 18-20-year-olds to acquire firearms from licensed dealers. This case could force the Supreme Court to address whether young adults have full Second Amendment rights.
More to Come!
While the recent Supreme Court decisions might seem like a pause in Second Amendment progress, Smith reassures that it’s part of a broader, strategic approach. The focus remains on building strong cases with sympathetic plaintiffs to secure favorable rulings in the long run. Stay tuned for more developments as the fight for gun rights continues.
For a more detailed analysis, you can watch Mark Smith’s video on this topic and check out his book “Israel Disarmed” for insights into Second Amendment issues.
The Court needs to become a much more proactive body.
Not enough money to be made finding for the common man.
they are going by past practices by waiting until a case has been decided by whatever lower court it is in before a full hearing. then hopefully there will be a definitive ruling hopefully authored by either justice Thomas or Alito
I think that many do not understand the way appellate courts work. When the Supreme Court denies an appealed case, it is not making a decision on that case but deciding to not consider the case for one or more reasons. It may find that the appellant does not have standing, which means that they feel that the appellant is not affected by the case. They may decide that the case is incomplete at the lower court. They may have other reasons. In any case, denying to hear an appeal is not the same as making a decision on the… Read more »
I see for some the point being made is difficult to understand. Why fight for a criminals rights when there are many who are innocent that are fighting for their Constitutional rights. When so many demand criminals should be punished to the fullest extent, why does that apply to everything except their 2nd Amendment rights. I believe it is a difficult fence to straddle. Better to litigate a case that is easily decided on its merits, historical precedence and alignment with the Constitution than try to overlook continuous failures to obey the laws of an individual and the courts/societies past… Read more »
“…these cases were interlocutory, meaning they hadn’t reached a final judgment.”.
Some people have trouble seeing things as they are written.
I have reached my final judgement…
HLB
Thank you. Very helpful.
Here’s what I am thinking!! That the USSC/SCOTUS is nothing more than a feckless bunch of mealy mouthed imbeciles! And the less they may say on any subject, the better I like it! Who ordains these cretins and idiots to be masters over us? They reversed a “decision” in 2022 that was left standing for 49 years, and then less than a month ago, reversed one that had been in place for 40 years! WTF is wrong with these people, that they cannot or will not keep themselves from making grievous errors?