Supreme Court Won't Hear Challenge To Calif. Gun Waiting-Period Case

Supreme Court won't hear challenge to California's waiting period for gun purchases

Supreme Court won't hear challenge to California gun waiting period

Lead plaintiff Jeff Silvester, the Calguns Foundation and its executive director Brandon Combs, and the Second Amendment Foundation in 2011 challenged the 10-day waiting period between the purchase of a firearm and its actual delivery to the buyer.

"Nearly eight years ago, this court declared that the Second Amendment is not a 'second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees, '" he said, quoting the court's precedent.

As previously mentioned, the Supreme Courts decision comes on the heels of the widely reported school shooting that took place at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida on February 14. The case was pursued by two California residents who argued that the waiting period should be waived for people who already owned guns and had passed the state's background check.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday decided not to hear a case challenging California's 10-day waiting period required after purchasing a gun in the state, and Justice Clarence Thomas is not happy.

"The Ninth Circuit's deviation from ordinary principles of law is unfortunate, though not surprising", Thomas wrote.

"Common sense suggests that subsequent purchasers contemplating violence or self-harm would use the gun they already own", the justice claims, "instead of taking all the steps to legally buy a new one in California".

Spotify Could Be Working on an Apple HomePod Killer
Apple has taken things a step farther with its HomePod speaker, which only supports Apple Music. Today, several hardware-oriented job ads ( spotted by MusicAlly ) have been posted to its site.

Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas issued an opinion blasting his colleagues for failing to take up the challenge of California's waiting period.

The National Rifle Association and state gun rights advocates argued the law violates the Second Amendment because the criminal misuse of firearms targeted by the APPS is not sufficiently related to the legal acquisition of firearms on which the fee is imposed.

After issuing major Second Amendment-related rulings in 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court largely has steered clear of deciding other important rulings on the issue.

"If this case involved one of the Court's more favored rights", he said, "I sincerely doubt we would have denied certiorari".

The 9th Circuit decision "is emblematic of a larger trend" in which the lower courts fail to protect the Second Amendment to the same extent that they protect other constitutional rights, Thomas said. "We have not heard argument in a Second Amendment case for almost eight years". Only Hawaii's 14-day period is longer.

Latest News