The Obama-Appointed Judge Who Just Overturned a Federal Gun Law

Published on February 4, 2024
Duration: 11:27

This analysis by William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, details a federal judge's ruling in Illinois that found 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1) unconstitutional. The ruling, based on the Supreme Court's Bruen decision, determined that the prohibition of firearm possession by individuals convicted of crimes punishable by more than one year lacks historical analog. The expert highlights the court's rejection of historical disarmament laws targeting specific groups and its affirmation that 'felons' are part of 'the people' protected by the Second Amendment.

Quick Summary

In United States v. Cherry, Judge Staci M. Yandle found 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1) unconstitutional, prohibiting felons from possessing firearms. The ruling, based on the Bruen decision, determined the law lacks historical analog and that 'felons' are part of 'the people' protected by the Second Amendment.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Overview of Obama-appointed judge ruling
  2. 01:07Case background: United States v. Cherry
  3. 02:02Defining 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1)
  4. 03:03The court's inquiry framework
  5. 04:02Applying the Bruen test
  6. 04:48Evaluating government's historical arguments
  7. 06:13Differentiating case law and statutes
  8. 07:19Reviewing historical disarmament analogs
  9. 09:26Court's final unconstitutionality ruling
  10. 10:05Future legal implications and related cases

Frequently Asked Questions

What federal gun law was overturned in the United States v. Cherry case?

The federal gun law overturned in the United States v. Cherry case was 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1). This statute prohibits individuals convicted of crimes punishable by more than one year (typically felonies) from possessing firearms.

On what legal precedent was the ruling against 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1) based?

The ruling was based on the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. This precedent requires that modern firearm restrictions must have a historical analog from the nation's founding era to be constitutional.

Did the court consider historical laws disarming specific groups as valid analogs for felony firearm prohibitions?

No, the court explicitly ruled that historical laws disarming groups like Catholics, Native Americans, or enslaved people were not relevantly similar to modern felony disarmament laws and therefore did not serve as valid historical analogs.

Who presided over the United States v. Cherry case where the federal gun law was overturned?

The United States v. Cherry case was presided over by Judge Staci M. Yandle in the Southern District of Illinois. She applied the Bruen opinion to find 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1) unconstitutional.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Washington Gun Law

View all →