BREAKING: Ninth Circuit Rules Suppressors Are NOT Protected by the 2nd Amendment

This video analyzes the Ninth Circuit's ruling in United States v. De Borba, which held that suppressors are not protected by the Second Amendment, classifying them as accessories rather than arms. The decision also upheld firearm prohibitions for individuals unlawfully present in the U.S. and those subject to domestic violence restraining orders, heavily referencing Supreme Court precedents like Bruin and Rahimi. The analysis highlights the ongoing legal battles surrounding the NFA and the importance of staying informed on Second Amendment case law.

Quick Summary

The Ninth Circuit, in United States v. De Borba, ruled that suppressors are not protected by the Second Amendment, classifying them as accessories. The court upheld the National Firearms Act's registration requirements, viewing it as a constitutional "shall-issue licensing system." This decision also affirmed firearm prohibitions for individuals unlawfully present in the U.S. and those under domestic violence restraining orders, referencing Bruin and Rahimi precedents.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction and Case Overview
  2. 00:28Ninth Circuit's "Circus" Ruling
  3. 00:45United States v. De Borba Explained
  4. 01:05De Borba's Immigration Status and Firearm Possession
  5. 01:19Domestic Violence Restraining Orders and Seized Firearms
  6. 01:35Charges Against De Borba
  7. 01:58Second Amendment Challenge to Immigration Status
  8. 02:29Impact of Rahimi Decision on DVROs
  9. 03:15The Suppressor Issue: A Major Focus
  10. 04:05Challenging NFA Suppressor Regulations
  11. 04:17Suppressors: Accessories or Arms?
  12. 04:30Ninth Circuit's Reasoning on Suppressors
  13. 04:57Suppressors as Safety Equipment
  14. 05:13NFA as a "Shall-Issue Licensing System"
  15. 05:46Blueprint for Future Regulations
  16. 06:06Vagueness Challenge to Suppressor Laws
  17. 06:45Implications and What's Next
  18. 07:01Suppressors: A Heavily Litigated Issue
  19. 07:16Rights Not Defended Become Privileges
  20. 07:42Viewer Opinions and Call to Action

Frequently Asked Questions

Are suppressors considered protected arms under the Second Amendment according to the Ninth Circuit?

No, the Ninth Circuit, in United States v. De Borba, ruled that suppressors are not protected arms under the Second Amendment. The court classified them as accessories or accoutrements, similar to scopes and slings, placing them outside the amendment's plain text.

How did the Ninth Circuit rule on the National Firearms Act (NFA) suppressor regulations?

The Ninth Circuit upheld the NFA's suppressor registration requirements, stating that the NFA functions as a "shall-issue licensing system." The court found this consistent with Supreme Court precedent, suggesting objective licensing systems can be constitutional.

What precedent did the Ninth Circuit rely on for firearm prohibitions related to immigration status?

The Ninth Circuit relied on its prior ruling in United States v. Vasquez Ramirez, which held that individuals unlawfully present in the United States can be prohibited from possessing firearms consistent with historical traditions of firearm regulation.

How did the Ninth Circuit apply the Supreme Court's Rahimi decision to the De Borba case?

The Ninth Circuit heavily relied on the Rahimi decision to uphold firearm prohibitions for individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders. They noted that De Borba's restraining orders contained judicial findings that he posed a credible threat to another person's safety.

What is the broader implication of the Ninth Circuit's ruling on how regulations are viewed in Second Amendment cases?

The ruling suggests that courts may uphold regulations if they can be characterized as "objective licensing systems" rather than "discretionary restrictions." This distinction is crucial for the future of Second Amendment litigation.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News

View all →