The landmark New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen decision struck down justifiable need clauses for concealed carry permits as unconstitutional. It affirmed our right to carry firearms outside the home for self-defense. It’s the law of the land. Liberals just have to deal with it. In Colorado, a local ordinance to ban so-called assault rifles got struck down by an Obama-appointed judge. Millions of Americans own the AR-15 rifle. It fits the bill when referring to weapons that are “common use.” This legal fight is in Superior, Colorado, outside of Denver (via The Reload):
U.S. District Judge Raymond Moore, an Obama appointee, issued a temporary restraining order against Superior, Colorado’s ban on “assault weapons.” The judge cited the Supreme Court’s New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen ruling extensively in one of the first significant decisions since the landmark case.
“In its simplest terms, the Second and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit governments from preventing ‘law abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear
arms,'” Moore said of the Court’s conclusion in Bruen.Employing the test created in Bruen, he ruled the town’s ban is unconstitutional.
“The conduct regulated by this provision of the Amended Code, the right to possess, sell, or transfer illegal weapons, (which, as defined, include weapons commonly used by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes), is covered, at least in part, by the Second Amendment, and therefore that conduct is presumptively protected,” Moore wrote.
If other courts applying the logic of Bruen find similar bans also run afoul of the Second Amendment, it could lead to changes all over the country. Seven states and the District of Columbia already have assault weapons bans. While support for such bans has been dropping, many Democrats in Congress are currently pushing for a federal version despite dim prospects for success.
That’s the next fight in the Second Amendment battle: bans on so-called assault weapons. The usual anti-gun blue states have them in place. That question will have its day in court eventually, but given how long it took to get justifiable need clauses placed under judicial scrutiny, don’t hold your breath.