Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    somewhere, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    623
    Rep Power
    21474849

    Default GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    https://gunowners.org/gun-owners-of-...reme-court.htm

    Gun Owners of America Funds Challenge to National Firearms Act in U.S. Supreme Court
    Published: 15 January 2019
    (January 14, 2019) -- Gun Owners of America (GOA) and its litigating arm, Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), today continued their defense of Jeremy Kettler, a disabled combat veteran, against a conviction for violating the National Firearms Act.

    Read GOA’s petition for certiorari before the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Click here to contribute to this case.

    The Obama Justice Department brought criminal felony charges against Jeremy for illegally possessing an unregistered firearm suppressor under the authority of the Kansas “Second Amendment Protection Act.”

    The Kansas statute declares that any suppressor manufactured, possessed, and used within the borders of Kansas is exempt from federal law. Relying on that Kansas law, in 2014 Jeremy purchased a suppressor from a local military surplus store, but did not register it with ATF pursuant to the National Firearms Act (NFA).

    Believing he was following the law, Jeremy posted a video about his new suppressor on Facebook, and ATF swooped in. Rather than simply requiring Jeremy to register his suppressor, the feds instead chose felony prosecution — to make an example of Jeremy, and to intimidate all who resist federal power over guns. Jeremy was indicted, and convicted of possessing an unregistered silencer, and now this veteran is a federal felon.

    GOA and GOF have stood with Jeremy, both in his appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, and now in the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Today GOA and GOF lawyers, representing Jeremy, filed a petition for a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Court to hear Jeremy’s case. The petition challenges the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which rejected Jeremy’s appeal from the district court.

    Jeremy’s petition first challenges the legitimacy of the National Firearms Act, which was passed in 1934, and thereafter upheld by the Supreme Court in 1937 under the constitutional power of Congress to “lay and collect taxes.” The petition argues that the NFA as it exists today no longer can be justified as a so-called “tax.”

    In fact, each of the reasons the Supreme Court gave in 1937, finding it to be a tax, no longer apply today, 82 years later. Rather, the NFA has become what Justice Frankfurter once described as regulation “wrapped ... in the verbal cellophane of a revenue measure” — an unabashed gun control regulatory scheme, designed not to raise revenue for the federal government, but instead to keep NFA items out of the hands of Americans.

    Next, Jeremy’s petition challenges the Tenth Circuit’s absurd holding that the Second Amendment applies only to “bearable arms” — but not firearm accessories, such as suppressors. The petition points out that the Second, Third, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits all have concluded that the Second Amendment extends beyond actual firearms to ammunition, magazines, the ability to purchase firearms in gun stores, and the right to practice at shooting ranges.

    Finally, Jeremy’s petition argues that, if the Supreme Court continues to uphold the NFA as a “tax,” then it is allowing Congress to impose a tax on a constitutionally-protected right — something which the Supreme Court has long said to be unconstitutional.

    Prior to the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh in October of last year, the Supreme Court had refused to hear numerous firearms cases, leading some members of the Court to comment on the “distressing trend” — “the treatment of the Second Amendment as a disfavored right.”


    While some do not seem to mind ATF’s regulation of weapons covered by the National Firearms Act, GOA and GOF have stood for the right to own “bearable arms” of all types, and firearms accessories as well — including suppressors and machineguns.

    GOA and GOF truly hope that this trend in the Supreme Court, to allow the lower courts to disregard the Heller and McDonald decisions, will begin to change, now that the Court has another solidly conservative member — who, as a judge on the D.C. Circuit, was unafraid to apply the Second Amendment text and the Heller decision to uphold gun rights. As stated in the GOA/GOF petition:

    For decades, the Second Amendment was largely ignored, and ever since this Court’s decision in Heller in 2008, the lower courts have found creative ways to avoid applying it to invalidate onerous infringements of protected rights. Fifth Circuit Judge Don Willett lamented that “Constitutional scholars have dubbed the Second Amendment ‘the Rodney Dangerfield of the Bill of Rights.’” As former Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski recently noted, “[t]he time has come to treat the Second Amendment as a real constitutional right. It’s here to stay.”

    This Court has allowed many Second Amendment challenges to go by the boards, although not without some if its members drawing attention to what was called this “distressing trend: the treatment of the Second Amendment as a disfavored right.” Peruta v. California, 137 S.Ct. 1995, 1999 (2017) (Thomas, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari). This case provides an appropriate vehicle to address the question of whether a tax on the exercise of Second Amendment rights is permissible.

    Jeremy Kettler’s petition presents solid, well-argued questions important to all gun owners, and we hope the Court will grant certiorari to decide them.

    Read GOA's petition for certiorari here -- and the Appendices here.

    And click here to contribute to this case.
    Last edited by buckengr; January 16th, 2019 at 06:37 PM.
    I am not a lawyer.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Lebanon, Tennessee
    Posts
    4,941
    Rep Power
    21474854

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    Let's hope they hear it.
    Life has a melody. Not great, not terrible.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania
    (Bucks County)
    Posts
    9,636
    Rep Power
    21474860

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    I fail to see a glimmer of legal foundation to a state or commonwealth law that declares itself exempt from federal law. Wasn't compliance with federal law part and parcel to being accepted when becoming a member of the united states?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh-South Hills, Pennsylvania
    (Allegheny County)
    Posts
    352
    Rep Power
    12252726

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    I find this part interesting, seeing as how silencers are firearms under US law:


    Next, Jeremy’s petition challenges the Tenth Circuit’s absurd holding that the Second Amendment applies only to “bearable arms” — but not firearm accessories, such as suppressors.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Penn area, Pennsylvania
    Age
    64
    Posts
    4,664
    Rep Power
    21474854

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    Politics! Each side is trying to find controversial hot-button issues solely to piss the other side off.
    I don't speak English , I talk American!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    NEPA, Pennsylvania
    (Wyoming County)
    Posts
    2,320
    Rep Power
    21474849

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    Quote Originally Posted by JustinHEMI View Post
    Let's hope they hear it.
    I'm not going to hold my breath. Apparently they can find time to hear a gun case for an Illegal Alien, and they will probably chalk that up as their token 2nd Amend case. I'm very doubtful that they want to touch a NFA case.

    The Supreme Court said Friday that it will take a case involving an illegal immigrant who claims he didn’t know his status had lapsed when he went to shoot a gun at a range, thus violating a law against illegal immigrants possessing weaponry.
    https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2...KKbivswgCuoT90
    "It seems that the Constitution is more or less guidelines than actual rules"
    My feedback: http://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=305685

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Chalfont, Pennsylvania
    (Bucks County)
    Posts
    2,393
    Rep Power
    21474853

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    Even IF they hear it (which they won't) the case stands no chance of being decided in Jeremy's favor.
    The scotus has been voting itself more and more power since before the civil war.

    There's no way they will blow the NFA out of the water.
    No swamp dwelling democrat or republican wants that.
    The big R machine is not your friend, kids. They only make the noises you want to hear.
    Crusader's local #556 South Central Asia chapter

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Uniontown, Pennsylvania
    (Fayette County)
    Posts
    2,195
    Rep Power
    16699917

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    If states can ignore Federal law on Marijuana, why cant they do the same with the NFA?
    Im asking a rhetorical question of course.
    "One must be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves” ~ Machiavelli

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    ., Pennsylvania
    Posts
    2,718
    Rep Power
    21474852

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    Quote Originally Posted by cdi View Post
    Even IF they hear it (which they won't) the case stands no chance of being decided in Jeremy's favor.
    The scotus has been voting itself more and more power since before the civil war.

    There's no way they will blow the NFA out of the water.
    No swamp dwelling democrat or republican wants that.
    The big R machine is not your friend, kids. They only make the noises you want to hear.
    ^^this^^
    or they hear it in a limited scope, only remove suppressors from it and we play "heller" games where politicians try to compartmentalize the ruling. "because that was only about handguns"

    or they deem it in their discussions as unconstitutional yet opt to rule in favor of the law because they do not want to upend thousands of existing fed/state/local laws, regulations, businesses whatever BS they can throw in with the sink.
    There is no way to make it out alive...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Sterling, Pennsylvania
    (Wayne County)
    Posts
    6,038
    Rep Power
    21474859

    Default Re: GOA backs challenge to NFA in SCOTUS

    Quote Originally Posted by Ricochet View Post
    If states can ignore Federal law on Marijuana, why cant they do the same with the NFA?
    Im asking a rhetorical question of course.
    My thought. ^^^^^^^^^

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Fife Files
    By 87th PVI in forum General
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 27th, 2009, 09:49 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •