Current Events > SCOTUS adamantly will not refuse to deny request to block Illinois ban on rifles

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-illinois-semi-automatic-rifle-ban-ar-15/

Washington The Supreme Court on Wednesday left in place for now state and local laws in Illinois that ban assault-style weapons, turning down a request to block the restrictions as the nation again finds itself grappling with a slew of recent mass shootings.

The brief, unsigned order from the high court rejects an application for emergency relief sought by a gun rights group and gun store owner who argued that the Illinois law and a Naperville ordinance violated their Second Amendment rights. There were no noted dissents.

The decision comes on the heels of a six-day span of fatal shootings beginning May 1: eight people were killed when a gunman opened fire at an outlet mall in Allen, Texas; one was killed in a shooting at a medical building in Atlanta; and six people were fatally shot in Henryetta, Oklahoma. Those deadly incidents came after four were shot and killed at a birthday party at a dance studio in Dadeville, Alabama on April 15; five died in a shooting at a bank in Louisville on April 10; and six people, including three children, were fatally shot at a private Christian school in Nashville on March 27.
...
The challenge to Illinois' ban from the National Association for Gun Rights is one of several winding their way through the federal courts. In a case brought by two gun owners, two gun shops and a trade association for the firearms industry in January, a federal district court blocked the state from enforcing the prohibition on semi-automatic rifles, finding that it likely cannot be "harmonized" with the Second Amendment.
"Whether well-intentioned, brilliant or arrogant, no state may enact a law that denies its citizens rights that the Constitution guarantees them," U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn wrote in an April 28 order. "Even legislation that may enjoy the support of a majority of its citizens must fail if it violates the constitutional rights of fellow citizens."

The state appealed the decision to the 7th Circuit, and a judge on the appeals court lifted the lower court's injunction on May 4, pending further action from the court. The order from the 7th Circuit allows the law to go back into effect for now.

Finally a good ruling

will not refuse to deny

Pogo_Marimo posted...

will not refuse to deny

When I see shit like this I just start deleting pairs of negatives in my head. So I ended up with SCOTUS will deny request to block ban on assault rifles

not refuse to deny request to block ban is a quadruple negative

Terrible topic title. Absolutely embarrassing

Have you ever had a dream that that you um you had you'd you would you could you'd do you wi you wants you you could do so you you'd do you could you you want you want him to do you so much you could do anything?

I still dont understand the whole infringe on second amendment part.

like the right is to bare arms. Im sure its been tried but cant that boil down to you can bare pistols and thats it or something similar? It seems absurd to classify bare arms as any arms when we know we turn around and ban other firearms already.

Not really. What this does is put it on schedule to be litigated fully rather than make a decision on an interlocutory appeal.