This past Monday, U.S. District Judge David Counts used a previous U.S. Supreme Court Ruling to determine that it is unconstitutional to prohibit people under felony indictment from exercising their 2A rights, reports the Texas Tribune.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!
Judge David Counts was appointed by former President Donald Trump to Texas’ western federal district and was the judge who ruled on the case of United States of America v. Jose Gomez Quiroz.
Jose Gomez Quiroz was indicted on charges of burglary and missing court dates last year, and during that time, he filled out Form 4473 at an Alpine store to purchase a pistol.
Quiroz lied about his indictment on this Federal form and, after the 7-day waiting period, was able to pick up his new handgun. It wasn’t until days later that the Federal system caught up, and the illegal purchase was flagged.
In June of this summer, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that law-abiding Americans have a right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense. This struck down a New York law that required people to submit to the government a “proper cause” in order to obtain a concealed carry license.
The SCOTUS case is known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association vs. Bruen and it essentially set a precedent that courts should only uphold gun restrictions if there is a tradition of them in United States history.
Judge Counts did not find a historical precedent to back a law that deprives 2A rights to citizens charged but not convicted of a felony.
The high court ruling in the New York case happened on the same day Quiroz was convicted. He appealed his conviction immediately, sourcing the New York ruling that he didn’t break any laws when he bought a gun while under felony indictment.
Judge Counts dismissed the charge against Quiroz because, according to his ruling, it is unknown “whether a statute preventing a person under indictment from receiving a firearm aligns with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
Judge Count also said it’s unknown, “the constitutionality of firearm regulations in a post-Bruen world.”
“This Court does not know the answers; it must only try to faithfully follow Bruen’s framework,” he added.