Judge Rules: 2A Protects Our Right to Homemade Guns
BY PGF
2 years, 1 month ago
On September 23, 2022, Judge Maryellen Noreika issued a preliminary injunction against Delaware in the case of Rigby v Jennings. The case is about whether the State of Delaware can outlaw homemade guns and the distribution of materials and software to make homemade guns.
*gasp* Ghost Guns!
The decision is a win for supporters of Constitutional rights but has some troubling verbiage. Judge Maryellen Noreika was appointed by President Trump in 2018.
Judge Noreika relies on the “Final Rule” from the ATF, which is under dispute in several cases, as to what is a “firearm.” Further arguments fall apart if the definition of a firearm reverts to the decades-old definition.
Judge Noreika then makes a claim, supported by a Colorado case, that if a commercial transaction may be regulated, then all transactions may be regulated. Footnote 11, p. 11:
Sections 1459(a) and 1463(b) do not solely target commercial transactions. There is no reason to believe, however, that the non-commercial character of a transaction changes the analysis. See Colorado Outfitters Ass’n v. Hickenlooper, 24 F. Supp. 3d 1050, 1074 (D. Colo. 2014) (“Logically, if the government can lawfully regulate the ability of persons to obtain firearms from commercial dealers, that same power to regulate should extend to non-commercial transactions.”),vacated on other grounds and remanded, 823 F.3d 537 (10th Cir. 2016).
This is a jump of logic and directly against the dicta in Heller, which states the Second Amendment allows:
“laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
There must be a differentiation between the commercial sale of arms and non-commercial transactions, or the above statement is nonsensical.
Somebody is going to tell us about an acre of wheat grown for private use that “could be” sold out of state.
|
|
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment