Trump Sends a Warning to Iran
WI Judge Who Helped Illegal Alien Escape Has Been Indicted
Did Hakeem Jeffries Just Threaten Federal Law Enforcement?
All Is Not Well in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's District
Federal Judge Just Handed Trump a Huge Win. Here's What It Means for...
Republicans Control the House – So Why Did They Just Cave on Gun...
Oklahoma Passes Measure That Could Make Public Buildings Much Safer
DHS Warns AOC: Trespassing or Assault on ICE Agents Could Lead to Arrests
Saudi Arabia Unveils Mobile McDonald's for Trump’s Visit
Top GOP Members of Congress Call for Destruction of Hamas
Texas Senate Approves Pro-Life Monument Honoring Unborn at State Capitol in Bold Stand...
First-in-the-Nation: U.S. Indicts Sinaloa Cartel Leaders for Narco-Terrorism
RFK Jr.: European Price-Fixing Led to Trump Pharmaceutical EO
Planned Parenthood’s Latest Annual Report Is Out. They Took in More Money and...
GOP Senator Weighs in on Gift of Qatari Jet to Trump
Tipsheet

Question of Illegal Aliens Having Second Amendment Rights Goes to Appeals Court

AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli

The Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals will hear the question of whether illegal aliens have Second Amendment rights, in the case USA v. Heriberto Carbajal-Flores.

Advertisement

The case regards Flores’ arrest in Chicago for having a firearm.

Margaret Steindorf, who represents the federal government in the case, said Flores’ immigration status is important, stating that “[T]here is the common thread here of felons not abiding by the law and those unlawfully in the country also not authorized to be in the country” when arguing court precedent for certain people to not be allowed to possess a firearm.

Jacob Briskman, representing Flores, said however that the rights granted to “the people” don’t only apply to certain amendments in the Constitution, stating that “[T]he [U.S.] Supreme Court has decided that undocumented folks have First Amendment protections, Fourth Amendment protections, Fifth Amendment protections when they have come within the United States and developed substantial ties,” and added that Flores’s wife and children are citizens of the United States.

Advertisement

However, having a gun wasn’t Flores’s only crime, Steindorf argued, adding that “[T]he district court erred when it found defendant was non-violent when in fact the defendant shot a firearm seven times at a passing car without provocation and tried to shoot at a second passing car shortly thereafter.”

Briskman argued that Flores still should have Second Amendment rights regardless, saying that “[S]tripping people of Second Amendment rights because of a criminal history or because they are not responsible are not supported by case law, as [recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent in United States v.] Rahimi has shown.”

The case was taken by the appeals court under advisement.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement