Supreme Court turns away a 2nd Amendment challenge to blue-state bans on assault weapons
Gun rights advocates say these AR-15s are owned by millions of Americans, and they argue the 2nd Amendment protects weapons that are 'in common use by law-abiding citizens.'
But they fell one vote short of winning a hearing on the question before the Supreme Court.
Three conservatives — Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito and Neil M. Gorsuch — voted to hear the 2nd Amendment challenge.
But Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh refused for now to cast the key fourth vote. He called the lower court ruling upholding Maryland's ban 'questionable,' but agreed with the majority in turning down the appeal for now.
'In my view, this court should and presumably will address the AR–15 issue soon, in the next Term or two,' Kavanaugh said.
The closely watched appeal had been pending since December, and the outcome suggests that the majority, including Chief Justice John G. Roberts, is not ready to strike down state laws that restrict semi-automatic guns.
Monday's no-comment orders let stands law in Maryland and Rhode Island that forbid the sale or possession of 'assault weapons' and large-capacity magazines.
California adopted the nation's first ban on assault weapons in 1989. Since then, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Washington have enacted similar laws, all of which would have been struck down if Maryland's law were ruled unconstitutional.
Lawmakers in California and nine other Democratic-led states say these rapid-fire weapons are especially dangerous and not needed for self-defense.
Maryland said its ban applies to 'certain highly dangerous, military-style assault weapons of the sort used in a series of highly publicized mass shootings.'
The case tested the reach of the 2nd Amendment and its 'right to keep and bear arms.'
For more than a decade, the justices have turned away gun-rights appeals that challenged local or state bans on assault weapons.
In 2008, the court ruled for the first time that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to self-defense, but its constitutional rulings since then have been modest in their impact.
The justices struck down city ordinances in Washington and Chicago laws that prohibited private possession of handguns, and they ruled states may not deny law-abiding citizens a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
In opinion polls, most Americans are opposed to a ban on handgun possession but they support a ban on semi-automatic assault rifles.
Maryland passed its ban on 'assault weapons' after the mass shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, where 20 children and six school employees were killed.
The law was upheld last year in an opinion written by a prominent conservative judge.
Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson, a Reagan appointee who was a finalist for a Supreme Court nomination in 2005, said the AR-15, AK-47 and similar rapid-fire rifles are not protected by the 2nd Amendment.
'They are military-style weapons designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense,' he wrote in a 9-5 decision by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. 'We decline to wield the Constitution to declare that military-style armaments which have become primary instruments of mass killing and terrorist attacks in the United States are beyond the reach of our nation's democratic processes.'
The dissenters said the 2nd Amendment protects the right to the 'arms' that are in common use.
'Today, the AR-15 and its variants are one of the most popular and widely owned firearms in the Nation,' wrote Judge Julius Richardson, a Trump appointee.
'As of 2021, there are at least 28 million AR-style semiautomatic rifles in circulation. For context, this means that there are more AR-style rifles in the civilian market than there are Ford F-Series pickup trucks on the road — the most popular truck in America.'
Three years ago, the court said in an opinion by Thomas that the 2nd Amendment should be interpreted based on the nation's history and tradition of gun regulations.
However, the two sides in the Maryland case differed on what to glean from that history.
Gun-rights advocates said there was no early history of laws banning common firearms.
But some judges and state lawyers said the history shows that when new dangers arose—including stored gun powder, dynamite and machine guns—new restrictions were written into law. If so, that would support new laws adopted in response to the danger posed by rapid-fire weapons.
The justices denied review in the case of Snope vs. Brown in the fall.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
44 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Why hosting a July Fourth pool party may cost less this year
NEW YORK (AP) — Americans have one more reason to celebrate this Fourth of July: getting all the gear needed to host a pool party costs less than it has in years, according to a market research company's preliminary data. The total price to buy beach towels, a beverage cooler, bathing suits and other accountrements of summer fun averaged $858 in June, the lowest amount for the month since 2020, consumer data provider Numerator said in an analysis prepared for The Associated Press. The finding from the firm's seasonal snapshot comports with broader economic measures indicating that U.S. consumers so far have not seen major impacts from President Donald Trump's vigorous application of tariffs on foreign goods. Numerator tracks U.S. retail prices through sales receipts, online account activity and other information from a panel of 200,000 shoppers. To see how prices are shaping up for the summer, the company looked at the average purchase price for 16 seasonal items typically made in China . Along with four towels, a cooler and bathing suits for two adults and a toddler, the hypothetical shopping list for a poolside gathering included a grill, four patio chairs, four cushions, a patio umbrella and four outdoor pillows. Recreation supplies included a cornhole set, two pairs of swim goggles, a set of diving rings, two beach balls and two pool floats or noodles. Leo Feler, Numerator's chief economist, offered a few theories for why buying all that stuff cost 11% less last month than it did in June 2023, when the average cost reached a high of $966, and 8.4% less than it did in June 2024. Wholesale suppliers and retailers that order from Chinese manufacturers may have imported too much stock while trying to stay ahead of high tariff bills , Feler said. As declining consumer confidence measures pointed to the possibility of weak sales , those businesses might have offered early discounts rather than risking their merchandise going unsold, he said. Given wide swings in Trump's trade posture toward China , retail vendors may have decided to absorb any initial tariff costs instead of trying to figure out how much more to charge their business customers, Feler said. The tariff rate on Chinese products soared to 145% in April before China and the U.S. reached a deal last month that brought the overall rate down to 55%. Suppliers often work on six-month contracts that are signed in January or February and again in June or July. That means many contracts for patio tables and chairs, for example, were signed before the White House included metal furniture in the aluminum or steel products that would be subject to a 25% tariff that went up to 50% last month. Customers who want to buy a new set of beach towels or to replace an old cooler still might want to hold off until August since prices will get lower in late summer, Feler said. But waiting until next year may prove costly, if the tariffs on products from China remain in place, he said. Just because preparing for a backyard bash might be comparatively less expensive right now, many economists and retail industry analysts still expect consumers to feel the weight of Trump's favorite trade negotiation tool. Shoppers are likely to see higher prices for back-to-school items starting in July and August, according to Feler. The time it's taking for the extra taxes on imports to reach stores could turn out like the pandemic-induced supply chain disruptions that contributed to U.S. inflation in 2021 and 2022. 'It wasn't like there was a sudden surge,' Feler said. 'It was a few prices increased here, then a few more prices, and a few other prices, and a couple more prices. And it started gaining speed.'
an hour ago
Trump to kick off a yearlong celebration of America's 250th anniversary
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to deliver a 'spectacular' yearlong birthday party to mark 250 years of American independence. On Thursday, he will be in the U.S. heartland to kick off the patriotic festivities leading up to next year's anniversary. The event at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines will feature 'dazzling' displays of Americana and American history, musical performances and a fireworks show to cap the night, said U.S. Ambassador Monica Crowley, Trump's liaison to the organizing group, America250. Organizers see the coming year of festivities as a way to help unite a polarized nation and bridge partisanship — a monumental task given the country's divides. Thursday's event comes as the Republican-controlled Congress pushed for final passage of a sweeping tax cuts and spending package that's at the heart of Trump's legislative agenda but has united all Democrats against it. More U.S. adults also disapprove than approve of how the Republican president is doing his job. Iowa was a 'logical choice' for the kickoff, Crowley said, because of its central location and Trump's affinity for the state, which supported him in each of the last three general elections. She also said Iowa's middle-of-the-country geography is symbolic of the desire to use the coming celebrations to help bring people together. 'We've had so much division and so much polarization over the last many decades, but certainly over the last few years, that to be able to bring the country together to celebrate America's 250th birthday through patriotism, shared values and a renewed sense of civic pride, to be able to do that in the center of the country, is incredibly important,' she said. A recent Gallup poll showed the widest partisan split in patriotism in over two decades, with only about a third of Democrats saying they are proud to be American compared with about 9 in 10 Republicans. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults approve of Trump's performance as president, according to a June AP-NORC poll, while about 6 in 10 disapprove. That poll also showed a majority of Americans said the June military parade that Trump greenlit in Washington for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army — an event that fell on his 79th birthday — was 'not a good use' of government money. Crowley spoke to the political and ideological schisms that left the country 'torn apart' ahead of its last big birthday celebration, noting that 1976 closely followed the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal that led Richard Nixon to resign from the presidency. 'That moment was critical to uniting the country and moving forward, and I am very optimistic and hopeful that the yearlong celebration that we're about to launch will do the same thing in this present moment,' she said in an interview. America's 250th birthday 'is something that I think that all Americans can come together to celebrate and honor our history as well as our present and our future,' Crowley said. On July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence, officially marking the 13 colonies' split from Great Britain. 'We're gonna have a big, big celebration, as you know, 250 years,' Trump said about the birthday during his Memorial Day address to a solemn audience at Arlington National Cemetery. 'In some ways, I'm glad I missed that second term where it was because I wouldn't be your president for that." Video of then-candidate Trump proposing a 'Great American State Fair' in Iowa in May 2023 began to recirculate after his reelection last November. Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, a Republican, told the White House earlier this year that Iowa stood 'ready" to host the event and that Trump had the state's full support, according to a draft of Reynolds' letter obtained by The Associated Press. The culminating fair instead will be held next year on the National Mall in Washington, according to a White House official who was not authorized to share details publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. But Trump honored his initial proposal with a kickoff in the first-in-the-nation caucus state. The lineup Thursday night will include Lee Greenwood, according to social media posts advertising the event, whose song, 'God Bless the USA,' is a regular feature at Trump rallies and official events. Also attending will be Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins.
an hour ago
How a GOP rift over tech regulation doomed a ban on state AI laws in Trump's tax bill
NEW YORK -- A controversial bid to deter states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade seemed on its way to passing as the Republican tax cut and spending bill championed by President Donald Trump worked its way through the U.S. Senate. But as the bill neared a final vote, a relentless campaign against it by a constellation of conservatives — including Republican governors, lawmakers, think tanks and social groups — had been eroding support. One, conservative activist Mike Davis, appeared on the show of right-wing podcaster Steve Bannon, urging viewers to call their senators to reject this 'AI amnesty' for 'trillion-dollar Big Tech monopolists.' He said he also texted with Trump directly, advising the president to stay neutral on the issue despite what Davis characterized as significant pressure from White House AI czar David Sacks, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and others. Conservatives passionate about getting rid of the provision had spent weeks fighting others in the party who favored the legislative moratorium because they saw it as essential for the country to compete against China in the race for AI dominance. The schism marked the latest and perhaps most noticeable split within the GOP about whether to let states continue to put guardrails on emerging technologies or minimize such interference. In the end, the advocates for guardrails won, revealing the enormous influence of a segment of the Republican Party that has come to distrust Big Tech. They believe states must remain free to protect their citizens against potential harms of the industry, whether from AI, social media or emerging technologies. 'Tension in the conservative movement is palpable,' said Adam Thierer of the R Street Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank. Thierer first proposed the idea of the AI moratorium last year. He noted 'the animus surrounding Big Tech' among many Republicans. "That was the differentiating factor.' The Heritage Foundation, children's safety groups and Republican state lawmakers, governors and attorneys general all weighed in against the AI moratorium. Democrats, tech watchdogs and some tech companies opposed it, too. Sensing the moment was right on Monday night, Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who opposed the AI provision and had attempted to water it down, teamed up with Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington to suggest striking the entire proposal. By morning, the provision was removed in a 99-1 vote. The whirlwind demise of a provision that initially had the backing of House and Senate leadership and the White House disappointed other conservatives who felt it gave China, a main AI competitor, an advantage. Ryan Fournier, chairman of Students for Trump and chief marketing officer of the startup Uncensored AI, had supported the moratorium, writing on X that it 'stops blue states like California and New York from handing our future to Communist China.' 'Republicans are that way ... I get it,' he said in an interview, but added there needs to be 'one set of rules, not 50' for AI innovation to be successful. Tech companies, tech trade groups, venture capitalists and multiple Trump administration figures had voiced their support for the provision that would have blocked states from passing their own AI regulations for years. They argued that in the absence of federal standards, letting the states take the lead would leave tech innovators mired in a confusing patchwork of rules. Lutnick, the commerce secretary, posted that the provision 'makes sure American companies can develop cutting-edge tech for our military, infrastructure, and critical industries — without interference from anti-innovation politicians.' AI czar Sacks had also publicly supported the measure. After the Senate passed the bill without the AI provision, the White House responded to an inquiry for Sacks with the president's position, saying Trump "is fully supportive of the Senate-passed version of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill." Acknowledging defeat of his provision on the Senate floor, Cruz noted how pleased China, liberal politicians and 'radical left-wing groups' would be to hear the news. But Blackburn pointed out that the federal government has failed to pass laws that address major concerns about AI, such as keeping children safe and securing copyright protections. 'But you know who has passed it?' she said. 'The states.' Conservatives distrusting Big Tech for what they see as social media companies stifling speech during the COVID-19 pandemic and surrounding elections said that tech companies shouldn't get a free pass, especially on something that carries as much risk as AI. Many who opposed the moratorium also brought up preserving states' rights, though proponents countered that AI issues transcend state borders and Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Eric Lucero, a Republican state lawmaker in Minnesota, noted that many other industries already navigate different regulations established by both state and local jurisdictions. 'I think everyone in the conservative movement agrees we need to beat China," said Daniel Cochrane from the Heritage Foundation. 'I just think we have different prescriptions for doing so.' Many argued that in the absence of federal legislation, states were best positioned to protect citizens from the potential harms of AI technology. 'We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous,' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene wrote on X. Another Republican, Texas state Sen. Angela Paxton, wrote to Cruz and his counterpart, Sen. John Cornyn, urging them to remove the moratorium. She and other conservatives said some sort of federal standard could help clarify the landscape around AI and resolve some of the party's disagreements. But with the moratorium dead and Republicans holding only narrow majorities in both chambers of Congress, it's unclear whether they will be able to agree on a set of standards to guide the development of the burgeoning technology. In an email to The Associated Press, Paxton said she wants to see limited federal AI legislation 'that sets some clear guardrails' around national security and interstate commerce, while leaving states free to address issues that affect their residents. "When it comes to technology as powerful and potentially dangerous as AI, we should be cautious about silencing state-level efforts to protect consumers and children,' she said.
