Molly B. Posted July 16, 2024 at 07:04 PM Posted July 16, 2024 at 07:04 PM BELLEVUE, Wash. — July 16, 2024 — A three-judge panel in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has handed down a unanimous 27-page ruling that Minnesota’s ban on concealed carry by young adults is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, giving a victory to the Second Amendment Foundation and its partners. SAF is joined in the lawsuit, known as Worth v. Jacobson, by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus and four citizens, Austin Dye, Alex Anderson, Joe Knudsen and Kristin Worth, for whom the case is known. They are represented by attorneys Blair W. Nelson in Bemidji, Minn., and David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson and William V. Bergstrom at Cooper & Kirk in Washington, D.C. Acknowledging that the right to keep and bear arms is a natural right, Circuit Judge Duane Benton observed, “First, the right to keep and bear arms ‘is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment declares that it shall not be infringed.’” Judge Benton adds, “Importantly, the Second Amendment’s plain text does not have an age limit…. Ordinary, law-abiding 18 to 20-year-old Minnesotans are unambiguously members of the people. Because the plain text of the Second Amendment covers the plaintiffs and their conduct, it is presumptively constitutionally protected… “Minnesota has not met its burden to proffer sufficient evidence,” he concludes. “The Carry Ban…violates the Second Amendment as applied to Minnesota through the Fourteenth Amendment, and, thus, is unconstitutional.” “This is a significant victory for the rights of young adults,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “It is one more step in our crusade to win firearms freedom one lawsuit at a time.” “We are encouraged that yet another circuit court has correctly concluded that 18-20-year-olds are, in fact, part of ‘the People’ to which the Second Amendment extends,” added SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “This nation’s history and tradition demonstrate that the bans affecting young adults are not consistent with the right to keep and bear arms and SAF will continue to aggressively challenge these bans which create a tiered system of constitutional rights.” Worth-Opinion.pdf under 21 carry 8th circuit win.pdf
mikew Posted July 16, 2024 at 08:02 PM Posted July 16, 2024 at 08:02 PM Please Minnesota, please appeal to SCOTUS.
mab22 Posted July 16, 2024 at 09:31 PM Posted July 16, 2024 at 09:31 PM Illinois won’t care, they will say it’s in Minnesota and we’re not in Minnesota.
ragsbo Posted July 16, 2024 at 10:59 PM Posted July 16, 2024 at 10:59 PM On 7/16/2024 at 4:31 PM, mab22 said: Illinois won’t care, they will say it’s in Minnesota and we’re not in Minnesota. Only will matter if the courts force them to, then they will drag their feet and try to skirt around it
mab22 Posted July 17, 2024 at 01:39 AM Posted July 17, 2024 at 01:39 AM On 7/16/2024 at 5:59 PM, ragsbo said: Only will matter if the courts force them to, then they will drag their feet and try to skirt around it Like I says, Illinois democraps won’t care unless forced.
JTHunter Posted July 19, 2024 at 09:01 PM Posted July 19, 2024 at 09:01 PM On 7/16/2024 at 8:39 PM, mab22 said: Like I says, Illinois democraps won’t care unless forced. Yeah, Judge Posner found that out when he made his ruling 11 years ago.
Euler Posted August 2, 2024 at 05:21 AM Posted August 2, 2024 at 05:21 AM docket On July 30, Jacobson filed a petition for Minnesota to rehear the case en banc. On August 1, Illinois filed an amici brief for itself, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, DC, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, presumably in support of Minnesota. (I haven't read it.) BTW, CA8 covers Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.
Euler Posted November 11, 2024 at 02:52 AM Posted November 11, 2024 at 02:52 AM Minnesota is in the process of petitioning the Supreme Court as Jacobson v Worth. (shadow docket) On October 23, Minnesota asked for an extension to file a petition. On October 30, Kavanaugh granted an extension to January 17.
Euler Posted January 24, 2025 at 08:59 PM Posted January 24, 2025 at 08:59 PM On January 17, MN met its deadline. The petition got a real docket number.
ragsbo Posted January 24, 2025 at 09:25 PM Posted January 24, 2025 at 09:25 PM On 11/10/2024 at 8:52 PM, Euler said: Minnesota is in the process of petitioning the Supreme Court as Jacobson v Worth. (shadow docket) On October 23, Minnesota asked for an extension to file a petition. On October 30, Kavanaugh granted an extension to January 17. Need to stop giving these extensions, just a stalling process when they know they have a week case
Euler Posted February 11, 2025 at 05:00 AM Posted February 11, 2025 at 05:00 AM On February 6, Worth asked for an extension to file a response. On February 7, the Court extended the deadline for a response to March 10.
Euler Posted March 10, 2025 at 06:48 PM Posted March 10, 2025 at 06:48 PM On March 10, Worth met the deadline.
Euler Posted March 16, 2025 at 07:56 AM Posted March 16, 2025 at 07:56 AM On March 10, 2025 at 01:48 PM CDT, Euler said:→On March 10, Worth met the deadline. Remember that the circuit court ruled for Worth and that Minnesota is petitioning for certiorari. Worth's response says: Response said:... The federal courts of appeals have indeed split over the constitutionality of restrictions on 18-to-20-year-olds' right to carry firearms or to acquire them in the first place. ... Respondents therefore join Petitioner's request that the Court grant review and set the case for argument. But the Court should do so to affirm the court below, not to reverse it. ... Mark Smith has a video out about it, possibly because ... Response said:... OTHER AUTHORITIES ...Mark W. Smith, Attention Originalists: The Second Amendment was adopted in 1791, not 1868, HARV. J.L. & PUB. POL'Y PER CURIAM (Dec. 7, 2022), https://perma.cc/8CSW-QB2L ........................ 19...
JTHunter Posted March 18, 2025 at 04:10 AM Posted March 18, 2025 at 04:10 AM Good video Euler. Thanks.
EdDinIL Posted April 21, 2025 at 06:53 PM Posted April 21, 2025 at 06:53 PM SCOTUS denied cert today. So, both sides wanted cert, Worth said there was a circuit split, and SCOTUS punted it, leaving a circuit split in place? Is that correct?
TomKoz Posted April 21, 2025 at 08:40 PM Posted April 21, 2025 at 08:40 PM On 4/21/2025 at 1:53 PM, EdDinIL said: SCOTUS denied cert today. So, both sides wanted cert, Worth said there was a circuit split, and SCOTUS punted it, leaving a circuit split in place? Is that correct? The Supreme Court is too busy dealing with all the Lefties injunctions against Trump! purple ??
soundguy Posted April 21, 2025 at 08:57 PM Posted April 21, 2025 at 08:57 PM Sounds like maybe this is a big 2A win... Cheers, Tim
EdDinIL Posted April 22, 2025 at 01:44 PM Posted April 22, 2025 at 01:44 PM On 4/21/2025 at 3:40 PM, TomKoz said: The Supreme Court is too busy dealing with all the Lefties injunctions against Trump! purple ?? That was part of what Mark @ 4 Boxes said in his video, actually. Also, in that video he said that he's not aware of a circuit split in this particular matter, so I'm not sure how that lines up with the reply from Worth that said there is a split. He did try to pick apart specific words (carry, purchase, possess, etc.) in relation to the Bruen decision and a couple of other yet-to-be-resolved cases. It's complicated. lol At least there's a pro-2A precedent on the books now. Hopefully (ha!) other circuits see and accept that precedent.
yurimodin Posted April 22, 2025 at 02:43 PM Posted April 22, 2025 at 02:43 PM On 4/21/2025 at 3:40 PM, TomKoz said: The Supreme Court is too busy dealing with all the Lefties injunctions against Trump! purple ?? I guess working a little overtime is too much to ask.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.