(Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Friday said it would reconsider next month whether a federal law prohibiting nonviolent felons from owning firearms is constitutional in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year expanding gun rights.
The Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals voted to have the full court rehear the case of a Pennsylvania man convicted of welfare fraud who argued the ban violates the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment right to bear arms.
A three-judge panel in November had ruled against Bryan Range, who had argued it was unconstitutional under the U.S. Supreme Court’s June holding in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
In that case, a 6-3 conservative majority of the justices declared for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense.
The ruling, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, instructed courts going forward to determine if gun restrictions are “consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
Some good news out of the appeals courts on Guns lately!
This is always my question on Red FLag laws. Once again, the left focuses on the guns and not the person. taking their guns is liable to make them want to act out even more if they are unstable- with all manner of mayhem.
FWIW, certain non-violent felons are not prohibited-
20)The term “crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” does not include—
(A)any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or
I never have understood why someone convicted of a non-violent felony loses their 2A rights other than to encourage people accused of a felony to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, whether they’re guilty or not.