Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Abramski v. United States, 573 U.S. 169 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court found that making arrangements for a straw purchase of a gun is in violation of the Gun Control Act of 1968, and is different from re-selling or gifting a previously purchased gun.
Firearm case law in the United States is based on decisions of the Supreme Court and other federal courts.Each of these decisions deals with the Second Amendment (which is a part of the Bill of Rights), the right to keep and bear arms, the Commerce Clause, the General Welfare Clause, and/or other federal firearms laws.
State of Hawai'i v. Christopher L. Wilson is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of Hawaii. [1]It concluded that "there is no state constitutional right to carry a firearm in public" and that "as the world turns, it makes no sense for contemporary society to pledge allegiance to the founding era’s culture, realities, laws, and understanding of the [American] Constitution."
The Supreme Court has issued its biggest gun rights ruling in more than a decade. WHAT EXACTLY WAS THE SUPREME COURT RULING ON GUNS? The Supreme Court said that Americans have a right to carry ...
The case tested the limits of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc. v. Bruen, which expanded gun rights. Thomas wrote the opinion for that decision, ruling ...
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States.It ruled that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms—unconnected with service in a militia—for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and ...
The unanimous decision narrowed the Court’s previous decision in Smith v. United States in which the majority contended that Congress intended to give the word “use” a “broad meaning,” [3] and accordingly rejected the defense’s argument [4] that the statute was limited to the use of a firearm “as a weapon.” [5]
The court’s decision will determine whether that treatment continues, or whether minors and those who would fail a background check can evade basic firearm regulations by purchasing a ghost gun.