The Appeals Court rules that those convicted of nonviolent crime can own guns

The U.S. government cannot ban people convicted of non-violent crimes from possessing guns, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday.

A federal appeals ruling on Tuesday said that the U.S. Government cannot prohibit people convicted of crimes without violence from owning firearms.

The ruling of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court in Philadelphia was 11-4. The Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision is the latest blow to gun control laws following a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year that expanded gun rights across the country.

The ruling stems from the 2020 lawsuit of a Pennsylvanian man named Bryan Range who, after pleading to welfare fraud, was prohibited from owning a firearm under federal law. He claimed that the ban violated the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which gives him the right to bear arms.

Peter Patterson, Range’s attorney, wrote in an email: “We are delighted that the 3rd Circuit upheld the rights of our clients by faithfully implementing the Supreme Court’s ruling.”

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the federal agency that enforces gun laws, refused to comment.

Range pleaded to guilty in 1995 of welfare fraud in Pennsylvania, in order to receive $2,458 in food stamps. This is a misdemeanor punishable with up to five years in prison. He was sentenced three years probation.

The federal criminal code prohibits people who have been convicted of crimes punishable with more than one year in prison, from owning firearms. These crimes are typically felonies. However, the law includes state misdemeanors like Range’s.

In 2021, a federal judge ruled that Range was wrong. In June of last year, however, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, that Second Amendment protections include the right to carry guns for self-defense in public.

Circuit Judge Thomas Hardiman, writing for the majority of the court on Tuesday, said that the government failed to cite any laws dating back to the founding of the United States that established a tradition to disarm non-violent criminals.

Four judges dissented.

It is not for unelected judges to replace the judgment of the legislature when it has taken a reasonable, considered decision to disarm those that disrespect the law. Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause was one of the dissenters.

More Stories

Read More

Read More
Stay informed by joining TruthRow

24/7 coverage from 1000+ journalists. Subscriber-exclusive events. Unmatched political and international news.

You can cancel anytime