Confusing appellate decision re: 2A and illegal aliens

[danez71]

I do understand that, and when someone appears to be genuinely interested in learning, I try to make things accessible to him. But it's also been my experience that some people make things more difficult by letting their prejudices or preconceive notions get in the way.

As I've mentioned before, the law is often non-intuitive. And to some people it won't make sense because they don't have the necessary foundational knowledge. The reality of law is often at odds with what some people think the law is. The way the legal system actually works is often different from the way people think it works.

Often it helps if someone is able to accept the fact that he doesn't know and that he needs to learn.

Yes.... Thank You for your time and patience.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...As far as we know, he was not convicted of any crime apart from possessing a bullet...

No, he was convicted of possessing ammunition -- a complete cartridge, not a bullet (the separate projectile). Possession of ammunition by an illegal alien violates 18 SC 922(g)(5).

....So the 7th circuit has held that the Second Amendment does not prevent the government from banning possession of firearms and ammunition by people who are "difficult to track" (the example was having no address) and "have an interest in eluding law enforcement." The former might logically be extended to anyone who moves a lot for jobs, is between apartments, uses TOR, is a homeless veteran, is moving between hospitals, etc. This latter could include anyone who has unpaid parking tickets, has warrants, owes child support, or the like, even if they, like Meza-Rodriguez, have no criminal record.

No, the 7th Circuit upheld 18 USC 922(g)(5) prohibiting possession of a gun or ammunition by illegal aliens or aliens present in this country on other than a immigrant visa. But the case relates only to the application of 18 USC 922(g)(5) to illegal aliens.

18 USC 922(g)(5) survived the constitutional challenge as applied to illegal aliens because the 7th Circuit concluded that the government met its burden of showing a sufficient interest in preventing illegal aliens from possessing guns and ammunition. The government had argued that its interest in preventing an illegal alien from possessing guns or ammunition was related to an illegal alien's special interests in avoiding being found out because of the extreme consequences of being found out, i. e., deportation.

There are no laws prohibiting possession of guns or ammunition by, "...anyone who moves a lot for jobs, is between apartments, uses TOR, is a homeless veteran, is moving between hospitals, etc. This latter could include anyone who has unpaid parking tickets, has warrants, owes child support,...." No such question was before the court.

It's always necessary to read court opinions in context and in relation to the specific facts and circumstances.