As summer winds down and September looms, the Second Amendment Foundation is reporting significant activity on the legal front, perhaps signaling an end to summer lethargy and the beginning of autumn action.
On Thursday, SAF filed an amicus brief in a case known as Jamond M. Rush v. United States of America, which challenges restrictions on short-barreled rifles (SBRs). According to a SAF release, the case is similar to one in which SAF filed a brief earlier, David Robinson Jr. v. United States of America.
In Thursday’s amicus, SAF is joined by the Second Amendment Law Center, California Rifle & Pistol Association and Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus.
As in the earlier case, SAF attorneys contend that SBRs are “arms” under the plain text of the Second Amendment. Earlier this summer, Congress removed the special tax requirement on SBRs, and SAF quickly filed a lawsuit challenging portions of the 1934 National Firearms Act which covered the tax that no longer exists.
“Similar to other circuit courts, the Seventh Circuit decided that U.S. v. Miller (1939) and its ruling allowing restrictions on short-barrel shotguns because they had no documented militia use, remains controlling and applicable to SBRs as well,” said SAF Director of Legal Research and Education Kostas Moros. “Our amicus brief makes several arguments as to why the Seventh Circuit’s analysis was flawed and why the Supreme Court should grant cert in this case. We are hopeful the Supreme Court will step in and correct courts reaching the wrong conclusion on this fundamental question, both as it pertains to SBRs and to other common arms.”
“This is the second amicus brief we have filed in an SBR petition this month because this issue is critical to SAF as it directly relates to which sorts of arms the Second Amendment protects,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “In addition to amicus briefs, our new lawsuit in Brown v. ATF challenges the constitutionality of portions of the National Firearms Act, all with the same goal in mind: Restoring the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.”
Only a day earlier, SAF petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari in a case known as Viramontes v. Cook County, which challenges the ban on so-called “assault weapons” in Cook County, Ill. SAF is joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and individual plaintiffs Christopher Khaya and Cutberto Viramontes, for whom the case is named.
In a statement announcing the filing, Bill Sack, SAF director of legal operations explained, “The Supreme Court has indicated its interest in addressing assault weapons bans within the next term or two, and we think this case is a solid vehicle for that review. As Justice (Clarence) Thomas rightly pointed out in his dissent from denial in Snope, the longer SCOTUS delays, the longer millions of Americans are subject to these unconstitutional, categorical bans of the some of the most popular arms in America.”
Also on Thursday, SAF announced that the Supreme Court has distributed a case known as Madison Lara v. Commissioner Pennsylvania State Police for conference on Monday, Sept. 29. This case was originally filed in October 2020 in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. SAF was joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition and three private citizens, Madison M. Lara, Sophia Knepley and Logan D. Miller.
The case challenges Pennsylvania’s law prohibiting young adults in the 18-20-year age group from carrying firearms during a declared state of emergency. The Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has twice ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, but Pennsylvania appealed. Now the case is up for possible review by the high court.
“If you’re an adult, then you should be able to fully exercise your Second Amendment rights, period,” Gottlieb said. “The Third Circuit has made the determination that 18-20-year-olds are members of ‘the People’ more than once, and we are hopeful the Supreme Court will follow suit and determine that adults under 21 have the same rights as other American adults.”
