SCOTUS to hear Mainers’ appeal on gun ban for domestic violence conviction

[usmarine0352_2005]

Will SCOTUS ever take a carry case?






http://www.pressherald.com/2015/10/...mens-appeal-on-gun-ban-for-domestic-violence/

U.S. Supreme Court to hear Mainers’ appeal on gun ban for domestic violence convictions

In a case that will hinge on intent, a lawyer for the two men will argue that their guilty pleas for hitting their partners shouldn't bar them from owning guns.

Posted October 30 Updated October 31



The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the appeal of a gun case from Maine that is likely to turn on a very narrow point of law.

Two Maine men who pleaded guilty to domestic violence and later were found to possess guns said a federal law barring gun ownership by convicts shouldn’t apply to them because their conduct was reckless and not intentional.

 

[Old Fuff]

I'm somewhat surprised that they decided to review this case if all of the facts are what's represented in the article. If they were indeed guilty of the offence the fact that the violence was unintentional wouldn't seem like a creditable defense.

 

[barnbwt]

I thought the court already upheld Lautenberg recently? What's the new issue in this case, or is this the best they can do as far as addressing the many gun law schisms piling up?

 

[Frank Ettin]

Another poorly written and misleading news article. The issue which will be considered by the Supreme Court is very narrow. From Scotusblog:

....Both men allege that their convictions under Maine law for simple assault and misdemeanor domestic violence assault, respectively, do not automatically qualify as misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence for purposes of the federal law, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), because both provisions of Maine law can be violated by conduct that is merely reckless, rather than intentional....

...the Court agreed to review only the recklessness question; it declined to review a second question presented by the petition, which asked the Justices to rule on whether the ban on possession of firearms by individuals convicted of domestic violence violated their rights under the Second Amendment......

So this is likely to focus only on the interpretation of 18 USC 922(g)(9).

 

[usmarine0352_2005]

What are you're thoughts on this?




Did they take this case so they can shoot down these guys and this look like they are doing something about 'gun violence'?

 

[Frank Ettin]

What are you're thoughts on this?




Did they take this case so they can shoot down these guys and this look like they are doing something about 'gun violence'?

My thoughts on this is that we must wait and see. There is no way to know.