Read the Note Some Laid Off State Department Staffer Left Behind. It's Hilarious.
So, That's How That Judge Who Shut Down ICE Raids in Southern CA...
Here's What Led Senator Kennedy to Call This Anti-Trump Clown a Total Whack...
Wait...That's Why the NYT Raced to Get Their Mamdani Race Hoax Story Published
CA Judge to ICE: You Can't Enforce Immigration Law in the Greater Los...
Total Authorization
So What Were Our Genuine Enemies Up to While Brennan Headed the CIA?
Trump Authorizes ICE, Border Patrol to Arrest 'Slimeballs' Attacking Officers with Rocks,...
Google Silences Conservatives. Luxxle Fights Back.
Europe’s Environmental Laws Threaten American Businesses
All Eyes on Trump and Netanyahu
When Will Congress Support Trump's AI Agenda?
JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon: Democrats are 'Idiots'
Trump’s Tariffs Deliver: U.S. Posts $27 Billion Budget Surplus
Trump Visits Texas Flood Zone, Pledges Strong Federal Support Amid Tragic Losses
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