Elon's Vision
  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
No Result
View All Result
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
No Result
View All Result
Elon's Vision
No Result
View All Result
Home Editor's Pick

United States v. Duarte Brief: Universal, Lifetime Disarmament of Felons Is Unconstitutional

by
September 24, 2024
in Editor's Pick
0
United States v. Duarte Brief: Universal, Lifetime Disarmament of Felons Is Unconstitutional
0
SHARES
8
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Matthew Cavedon

In 2020, petitioner Steven Duarte was charged with the federal offense of possessing a firearm while a convicted felon; he had no violent crimes on his record. He was convicted after a trial and sentenced to be imprisoned for 51 months.

On appeal, a panel of the Ninth Circuit reversed Duarte’s conviction under the Second Amendment, holding that the government failed to show that permanently depriving Duarte of his fundamental rights is consistent with our nation’s history. However, at the government’s request, the Ninth Circuit vacated the panel’s decision and agreed to rehear the case en banc.

Cato joined an amicus brief filed by federal public and community defender offices asking the en banc court to hold that universal, lifetime disarmament of all people convicted of felonies is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court’s history-based test allows for only narrow, concrete, historically grounded exceptions to the Second Amendment.

Additionally, disarming all felony probationers reflects a judgment that all felonies are dangerous. That premise is belied by an aggressive, decades-long trend in American politics: overcriminalization. 

Overcriminalization bears out a commonly held fear about the government’s bid for extreme deference: that instead of tethering the Second Amendment to the dangers motivating our regulatory traditions, the government would give legislatures unreviewable power to manipulate the Second Amendment by choosing a label.

Exceptions to individual rights do not move with the political winds. When it comes to individual rights, history—not legislatures—determines the existence and scope of exceptions. This means that courts may not simply assume that the Second Amendment will expand or contract to fit any crime labeled a felony. Rather, courts must confront the reality of what modern felonies look like, and compare that reality to the government’s proposed historical analogues. 

Applying history’s lessons to today’s sprawling criminal codes, the court should conclude that the government has not met its burden to square universal felon disarmament with our regulatory traditions.

Previous Post

“Collaboration Between MESA and Tech-Clarity Sets the Stage for 2024-25 Analytics and AI Research Program”

Next Post

No CBDC, Says Canadian, Australian, and Colombian Central Banks

Next Post
No CBDC, Says Canadian, Australian, and Colombian Central Banks

No CBDC, Says Canadian, Australian, and Colombian Central Banks

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get the daily email that makes reading the news actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free.
Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!
  • Trending
  • Comments
  • Latest

Jay Bhattacharya on Public Health

October 12, 2021

That Bangladesh Mask Study!

December 1, 2021

Antitrust Regulation Assumes Bureaucrats Know the “Correct” Amount of Competition

November 24, 2021
Pints of champagne could be the next ‘Brexit dividend’

Pints of champagne could be the next ‘Brexit dividend’

December 24, 2021

Regime Uncertainty and the Trump New Deal

0

0

0

0

Regime Uncertainty and the Trump New Deal

May 22, 2025

“Certified Software from Cognigy Empowers Azure Customers as Microsoft Solutions Partner, Introducing Agentic Enterprise AI Agents”

May 22, 2025
Four Things the Senate Can Do to Improve the House Tax Bill

Four Things the Senate Can Do to Improve the House Tax Bill

May 22, 2025
SCOTUS Decision Against Religious Charter Is Right, But We Must Address Discrimination Against Religion

SCOTUS Decision Against Religious Charter Is Right, But We Must Address Discrimination Against Religion

May 22, 2025

Recent News

Regime Uncertainty and the Trump New Deal

May 22, 2025

“Certified Software from Cognigy Empowers Azure Customers as Microsoft Solutions Partner, Introducing Agentic Enterprise AI Agents”

May 22, 2025
Four Things the Senate Can Do to Improve the House Tax Bill

Four Things the Senate Can Do to Improve the House Tax Bill

May 22, 2025
SCOTUS Decision Against Religious Charter Is Right, But We Must Address Discrimination Against Religion

SCOTUS Decision Against Religious Charter Is Right, But We Must Address Discrimination Against Religion

May 22, 2025

Disclaimer: ElonsVision.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively "The Company") do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Copyright © 2025 ElonsVision. All Rights Reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock

Copyright © 2025 ElonsVision. All Rights Reserved.