It is no longer constitutional to ban people under felony indictment from buying guns, a federal judge in Texas ruled Monday.
U.S. District Judge David Counts, appointed by former President Donald Trump to Texas鈥� western federal district, found that a landmark invalidates federal law which prohibits those charged with a felony from obtaining a gun. It was not immediately clear if the ruling would be appealed.
This summer, the high court鈥檚 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association vs. Bruen, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, struck down the state鈥檚 concealed carry law and held that courts going forward should uphold gun restrictions only if there is a tradition of them in U.S. history. Counts said he found no such history for limiting access to guns for those charged but not convicted of felony crimes, though he acknowledged his search was 鈥渘ot exhaustive.鈥�
In the same ruling, Counts both tossed a charge of obtaining a firearm while under indictment and noted it was unknown 鈥渨hether a statute preventing a person under indictment from receiving a firearm aligns with this Nation鈥檚 historical tradition of firearm regulation.鈥� Also unknown, he said, is 鈥渢he constitutionality of firearm regulations in a post-Bruen world.鈥�
鈥淭his Court does not know the answers; it must only try to faithfully follow Bruen鈥檚 framework,鈥� he said.
In an earlier filing, the U.S. attorney鈥檚 office said the law to prohibit those under felony indictment from obtaining guns does not interfere with the Second Amendment 鈥渂ecause it does not disarm felony indictees who already had guns and does not prohibit possession or public carry.鈥�
鈥淭he Second Amendment has always allowed laws restricting the gun rights of groups viewed by legislatures as posing a public-safety risk, including those accused but not convicted of wrongdoing,鈥� the prosecution wrote.
The Texas case arose out of the conviction of a man who had purchased a gun while under indictment and lied about it during his background check, according to Counts鈥� ruling. Last year, while indicted on charges of burglary and missing court dates, Jose Gomez Quiroz tried to buy a semi-automatic pistol at an Alpine store. He denied he was under indictment on his background check form, and, after a seven-day wait for approval, picked up his new gun.
Days later, the federal system alerted that the purchase was illegal. He was convicted on the same day of the Supreme Court ruling. Almost immediately, he appealed, claiming the New York ruling invalidates the law he broke. Counts agreed.
鈥淭he Second Amendment is not a 鈥榮econd class right,鈥欌�� he ruled. 鈥淣o longer can courts balance away a constitutional right.鈥�
Nicole Golden, executive director of Texas Gun Sense, said there have long been 鈥渞easonable limitations鈥� on the right to bear arms enshrined in the Second Amendment.
鈥淪upport for sensible gun laws has been really high, especially this summer in the wake of Uvalde,鈥� Golden said. 鈥淭his feels very much in violation of what I think the public is expecting when it comes to how we address our public safety.鈥�