Americans under felony indictment have a right to buy guns, judge rules
Source: Reuters
(Reuters) - A federal law prohibiting people under felony indictment from buying firearms is unconstitutional, a federal judge in Texas has concluded, citing a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that significantly expanded gun rights.
U.S. District Judge David Counts, an appointee of Republican former President Donald Trump, reached that conclusion on Monday in dismissing a federal indictment against Jose Gomez Quiroz, who had been charged under the decades-old ban.
Counts cited the U.S. Supreme Courts ruling in June declaring for the first time that the right to keep and bear arms under the U.S. Constitutions Second Amendment protects a persons right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense.
Counts said that while the U.S. Supreme Court decision did not erase societal and public safety concerns about guns, it had changed the legal landscape. The Second Amendment is not a second class right, Counts wrote. No longer can courts balance away a constitutional right. Quirozs attorney and representatives for U.S. Attorney Ashley Hoff, whose office prosecuted the case, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Tuesday.
Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-guns-court-idCAKBN2QL1LD
But 4 Amendments to the Constitution about "voting" IS a "2nd class right".
It's like someone pushed a panic button and they are going full-throated throwing things at the wall, so maybe we are finally getting "close".
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)FBaggins
(26,756 posts)I would think that would be unconstitutional with or without this ruling
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)After being led to believe their voting rights were reinstated.
Not an attorney here.
FBaggins
(26,756 posts)The new indictment is for an alleged new crime (voting when they weren't allowed to)
SheltieLover
(57,073 posts)Sorry missed that in your post. Lots of distractions here.
Meadowoak
(5,556 posts)Groundhawg
(556 posts)But they say you can indict a ham sandwich.
An indictment isn't a conviction in any way and yes you can vote while under indictment.
It does seem like someone under indictment could be included in a red flag law to prevent them from getting weapons.
Kaleva
(36,327 posts)Meadowoak
(5,556 posts)Kaleva
(36,327 posts)sl8
(13,859 posts)Dr. Strange
(25,922 posts)Is there really a state which doesn't allow people to vote if they're under indictment? That seems shady as hell.
Igel
(35,337 posts)While widespread, it's not legal. Unless that's your job--like a prosecutor, for instance. Judges can't make that assumption, but hack politicians can and often do.
bluestarone
(17,017 posts)being DESTROYED!
Brainfodder
(6,423 posts)When too many unqualified appointed judges is NOT a secret, we might just have too many problems?
GenXer47
(1,204 posts)Trump judges are animals.
Traildogbob
(8,791 posts)MAGA soldiers that have been indicted, need to be able to get guns for the planned civil war. Their militias are taking as big a hit as Russian troops. When trumps Pardons take affect, they will go straight to gun stores to get War gear to follow the orders of dear leader. So Pardoned mass children shooters have a right to own guns. Sure, every life is sacred, right. FUCK GQP and their judges. And THEIR Jesus.
aocommunalpunch
(4,244 posts)kimbutgar
(21,177 posts)Decision. This gun bs is insane.
FBaggins
(26,756 posts)This ruling involves those who are indicted but have not been convicted.
kimbutgar
(21,177 posts)Response to FBaggins (Reply #9)
kimbutgar This message was self-deleted by its author.
chowder66
(9,074 posts)bucolic_frolic
(43,257 posts)Botany
(70,559 posts)Putin installed Trump, helps out the GOP, feeds stories into Fox News, and their like in order
to cause schisms in the nation's social fabric. Judge David Counts is one more cog in the on
going right wing coup to over come the demographic changes in America.
This ruling will cause more gun deaths, heartbreak, and divisions in America.
FarPoint
(12,428 posts)I do know' even some states won't let people who have had a felony vote even if release from a sentence....Of course, one can't vote when incarcerated and on probation but in many states they can vote after all requirements completed...
I just varies...My point is....if there is no law to prevent the indicted level criminal from buying a gun....there needs to be a law saying such.
sl8
(13,859 posts)FarPoint
(12,428 posts)sl8
(13,859 posts)cstanleytech
(26,316 posts)impartial judge.
ruet
(10,039 posts)as I haven't really gamed it though but; couldn't this logic be used to render pre-conviction imprisonment "unconstitutional"?
manicdem
(389 posts)I subscribe to this philosophy and we should live by it, even when it comes to guns and long jail times prior to trial. I'm guessing way back in the past, trials were pretty quick so pre-trial detainment wasn't an issue. But now someone can wait in jail for months, or years, until their trial concludes which is wrong.
LeftInTX
(25,511 posts)Believe me, we had "Ms. Felony Indictment" harassing voters at the polls. (She also ran for sheriff while she was under indictment) The courts finally ordered her to stay away from political events.
She was found guilty a few weeks ago and can't vote in the Nov election.
She also won't be harassing voters at the polls, because I believe she will be given a probation and terms of her probation will bar her from political events.
Dysfunctional
(452 posts)twodogsbarking
(9,788 posts)James48
(4,438 posts)So I guess as long as Im out on bail, and I can still pick up a new AR, cant I?
How delightful!
czarjak
(11,287 posts)sl8
(13,859 posts)UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. (1) JOSE GOMEZ QUIROZ