Appeals Court Showdown: Gun Rights Advocates Challenge Delaware Recent Laws

The struggle continues regarding the 2nd Amendment.

In today’s case, we have lawyers who believe in the sacred right to bear arms, which might be as American as apple pie.

These lawyers are urging the appeals court in Delaware to basically reverse a judge’s decision that allowed for banning of certain types of firearms.

The 2nd Amendment doesn’t only pertain to muskets and pocket knifes.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Arms is arms is arms is arms.

And ‘infringe’ means: to actively violate or encroach upon something, typically a right or privilege, in a way that undermines or diminishes its scope or effectiveness.

Sounds exactly like the what Democrats are constantly doing in regards to bearing arms.

They’ll fight tooth and nail against gun rights, twist the laws, rename firearms (like “assault” weapons) and then create new laws banning the name they gave.

Verbal judo is what they’re doing.

But the people aren’t sitting down and taking it.

The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia is weighing whether to grant requests by gun rights advocates to bar Delaware laws they argue are unconstitutional.

via @SarahKatMueller https://t.co/Lmy19ZJD2v

— WHYY News (@WHYYNews) March 12, 2024

Fox News reports:

Lawyers for gun rights groups urged a federal appeals court on Monday to overturn a judge’s refusal to halt enforcement of Delaware laws banning certain semiautomatic firearms and restricting the size of firearm magazines.

Delaware’s Democrat-controlled General Assembly enacted laws in 2022 that ban the sale of several types of semiautomatic firearms and shotguns, and limit magazine capacity to 17 rounds.

U.S. District Court Judge Richard Andrews denied a request by opponents for a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of the laws until a court decides whether they are unconstitutional. The Delaware State Sportsmen’s Association, joined by other gun rights advocates, argues that the laws violate Delawareans’ constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Andrews ruled last year that the firearms and large-capacity magazines targeted by the laws are presumptively protected by the Second Amendment. Nevertheless, he refused to issue an injunction, saying the state had sufficiently established that the weapons and magazines “implicate dramatic technological change and unprecedented societal concerns for public safety.”

The gun restrictions are consistent with the historical tradition of firearm regulation in the United States, and opponents failed to demonstrate a likelihood of winning their lawsuit, Andrews concluded. He also said opponents had failed to show that they can’t adequately defend themselves with other firearms.

Delaware is one of nine states, along with the District of Columbia, that ban certain semiautomatic firearms labeled “assault weapons” by gun-control advocates. Delaware is one of 14 states, along with the District of Columbia, that restrict the size of ammunition magazines for semiautomatic weapons. The legal fight has drawn “friend-of-the court” briefs on both sides of the issue from several states.

“Every second of every day that Delaware’s law is enforced, it is preventing my plaintiffs from exercising their Second Amendment rights,” John Ohlendorf, an attorney representing the Firearms Policy Coalition and other appellants, told a three-judge panel in Philadelphia.

David Ross, an attorney hired by Delaware officials, said Andrews was correct in denying a preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the laws subjected them to irreparable harm.

Ross and other supporters of the laws also dismissed arguments that they should be declared unconstitutional because they target weapons and high-capacity magazines that are in common use and owned by millions of Americans.

“Common use is not and cannot be the exclusive criterion for Second Amendment analysis,” New Jersey Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum argued.

Instead, according to supporters of the laws, a key question is whether the firearms in question are commonly used for self-defense. The answer, they contend, is “no.”

“Your prototypical hunting rifle is going to be useful in self-defense, in sharp contrast to the large capacity magazines or the assault weapons,” Feigenbaum said.

Judge Jane Roth seized on the self-defense issue, suggesting that it’s not enough for opponents of the law to say only that the banned firearms are capable of being used for self-defense, instead of showing that they are commonly used for that purpose.

“I’m not sure about these automatic assault weapons, whether they are being used in self-defense,” Roth said, incorrectly characterizing the firearms at issue as fully automatic machine guns.

Aren’t ALL weapons, assault weapons?

This comes just after Delaware passed the bill that demands training for anyone that wants to buy a gun:

Delaware House pass gun bill requiring fingerprinting, training before purchasehttps://t.co/FQF7MpesZN

— Kaylee Georgia (@kaylee_Georgia0) March 8, 2024

These people never like to look at violence stats.

Who’s actually pulling the triggers?

It’s just the guns fault. Guns floating around killing people.