More
    HomeBreakingFederal Judge makes a Major Ruling on the Second Amendment that leaves...

    Federal Judge makes a Major Ruling on the Second Amendment that leaves the Biden Administration Fuming

    Published on

    According to news reports and court records, a judge selected by Democrats has invalidated a federal law that prohibits the ownership of weapons with their serial numbers removed, making Democrat Joe Biden a multiple court loss.

    Federal statute that forbids the ownership of firearms with serial numbers that have been “altered, destroyed, or deleted” was overturned by a district judge.
    The judgment will probably result in more victories against Democratic ambitions to seize additional firearms, infuriating the Marxist left.

    “According to reports last week, U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin in Charleston, W. Va., ruled that a federal ban on guns without a serial number or with a serial number removed is unconstitutional in the first such ruling since the U.S. Supreme Court upheld broader gun rights in a June ruling,” Jon Dougherty reported for Conservative Brief.

    According to Goodwin’s bio:
    “Joseph Goodwin is an Article III federal judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. He joined the court in 1995 after being nominated by President Bill Clinton. Goodwin served as chief judge of the court from 2007 to 2012.”

    Daughtery said that Goodwin’s decision on Wednesday was in line with the “historical history of firearm control” of the United States, which the Supreme Court established over the summer as a new basis for deciding Second Amendment disputes.

    Adding more information, according to Reuters:

    “The decision came in a criminal case charging a man, Randy Price, with illegally possessing a gun with the serial number removed that was found in his car. The judge dismissed that charge, though Price is still charged with illegally possessing the gun after being convicted of previous felonies.

    Price’s lawyer, Lex Coleman, called the decision “thoughtful, measured and accurate.” A spokesperson for the office of U.S. Attorney William Thompson in Charleston, which is prosecuting the case, said the office was “reviewing the ruling and assessing options.”

    The federal law in question prohibits anyone from transporting a gun with the serial number removed across state lines, or from possessing such a gun if it has ever been transported across state lines.

    Serial numbers, first required by the federal Gun Control Act of 1968, are intended to prevent illegal gun sales and make it easier to solve crimes by allowing individual guns to be traced.

    During oral arguments, Price said the law violates the Constitution following the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 24 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, which held that under the Second Amendment, the federal government is barred from restricting a citizen’s right to possess firearms unless the restriction meets the standard of historical tradition.

    In Bruen, since serial numbers were not required to be placed on firearms when the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791 and were only required after the passage of the 1968 law, they are outside the ‘historical tradition’ guideline.

    The high court’s June ruling was its most significant pro-Second Amendment decision in nearly two decades when justices ruled 6-3 that New York’s concealed carry law was unconstitutionally restrictive.

    The ruling, experts say, is significant because it means similarly restrictive concealed carry laws, limited primarily to blue states, are also likely to be successfully challenged.

    More on this story via The Republic Brief:

    “This decision is a big deal,” FiveThirtyEight noted in the wake of the ruling. “Previously, the court had only said that the Constitution protected the ability to have a gun inside the home for self-defense. In that decision, which came down in 2008, the justices didn’t rule on how guns carried outside the home could be regulated. It took almost 15 years for the justices to come back to that question, but now they have.”… CONTINUE READING…

     

    Latest articles

    Marjorie Taylor Greene Confirms Dems’ Worst Nightmare

    Since Elon Musk acquired ownership of the social media giant Twitter, he has not...

    Schumer Forced To Admit Trump Was RIGHT About ‘Enormous Threat’

    In 2020, when Trump voiced concerns about TikTok, he was ridiculed by the media....

    Bannon Delivers Blistering Message to Trump and His Team

    Steve Bannon delivered a stern message to Donald Trump and his staff on his...

    Gavin Newsome Announces Plans For Biden Ahead Of 2024 Presidential Election

    While Republicans are speculating who of the rising excellent prospects would be Trump's running...

    More like this

    Marjorie Taylor Greene Confirms Dems’ Worst Nightmare

    Since Elon Musk acquired ownership of the social media giant Twitter, he has not...

    Schumer Forced To Admit Trump Was RIGHT About ‘Enormous Threat’

    In 2020, when Trump voiced concerns about TikTok, he was ridiculed by the media....

    Bannon Delivers Blistering Message to Trump and His Team

    Steve Bannon delivered a stern message to Donald Trump and his staff on his...