Standard practice these days.
If a person is considered too dangerous to possess a weapon, he’s too dangerous to be left out on the street.
The Justice Department plans to appeal a Texas judge’s ruling that a federal law blocking people under felony indictment from purchasing firearms is unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court’s latest gun-related ruling.
U.S. District Judge David Counts found that the law’s prohibitions did not correlate with the Supreme Court’s June decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, in which the justices voted 6-3 (along conservative-liberal ideological lines) that law-abiding citizens have a right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense purposes.
“The Second Amendment is not a ‘second class right,'” Counts wrote. “After Bruen, the Government must prove that laws regulating conduct covered by the Second Amendment’s plain text align with this Nation’s historical tradition. The Government does not meet that burden.”
Counts, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, was tasked with weighing the case of Jose Gomez Quiroz, who was indicted on felony burglary charges related to a June 2020 incident. He allegedly jumped bail, attempted to purchase an automatic gun, and lied on his Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives transaction form but was still able to purchase the gun.
Quiroz was later convicted of making a false statement during the purchase of the weapon and illegal receipt of a gun by a person under indictment. He sought to dismiss the verdict because “of the United States Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Bruen,” according to court filings from Sept. 19.
Although Quiroz’s burglary charge is still pending, Counts sided with his position that the high court established a new “standard” in how it views Second Amendment rights.
“No longer can courts balance away a constitutional right,” Counts wrote.
Counts also voiced his doubt that a felony indictment should prevent someone from owning a firearm.
“The nature of grand jury proceedings is one such area that casts a shadow of constitutional doubt on” someone making a false statement on a firearm form, Counts wrote. “Some feel that a grand jury could indict a burrito if asked to do so.”
In a subsequent filing, the DOJ requested an appeal of Counts’s ruling in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.