As they battle over a 2018 Florida law that raised the minimum age from 18 to 21 to buy rifles and other long guns, attorneys for the state and the National Rifle Association are trying to use a new U.S. Supreme Court ruling to bolster their arguments.
The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a New York law that placed strict limits on carrying concealed weapons in public. Gun-control advocates have expressed concerns the decision could severely restrict states’ ability to regulate guns.
The ruling prompted Attorney General Ashley Moody’s office and the NRA to quickly make filings at the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the gun-rights group is challenging the constitutionality of the 2018 Florida law. The appeals court heard arguments in March but has not ruled on the challenge.
The state’s attorneys, relying on previous court rulings, have argued that gun regulations are permissible if they are consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation. Examples of other regulations include preventing felons and certain people with mental illness from having guns.
In a three-page “supplemental authority” filed Thursday, Moody’s office cited the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in the case known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen to defend the Florida law.
Senior Deputy Solicitor General Christopher Baum pointed to parts of Justice Clarence Thomas’ majority opinion to support the state’s stance about regulations being allowed if they are consistent with traditions.
“Analogical reasoning requires only that the government identify a well-established and representative historical analogue, not a historical twin,” Thomas wrote.
Florida “has made that showing here,” Baum wrote.
“Those under 21 may be prohibited from purchasing firearms because such restrictions are firmly grounded in historical tradition,” Baum wrote.
The state’s lawyer also highlighted part of a concurring opinion by Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote that the decision in the New York case “does not expand the categories of people who may lawfully possess a gun, and federal law generally forbids the possession of a handgun by a person who is under the age of 18.”
And Baum relied on a separate concurring opinion, which was authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh and joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, that said the New York ruling decided “nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun.”
But in supplemental authority also filed Thursday, the NRA’s lawyer argued that the state failed to demonstrate that Florida’s age restriction has a long connection with the past.
The state cited “no historical analogues imposing a burden comparable to the complete prohibition on young adults purchasing a firearm,” attorney John Parker Sweeney wrote.
“At the time of the founding, no law imposed restrictions on young adults’ ability to purchase firearms. The 19th and 20th century laws cited by appellee (the state) did not impose a burden comparable to the ban because they allowed young adults to purchase at least long guns,” Sweeney wrote.
Sweeney also used Thomas’ words to defend the gun-rights organization’s opposition to the law.
The Bruen ruling “rejected a ‘handful of late 19th century (laws)’ as insufficient to establish historical tradition and rejected 20th century laws as lacking ‘insight into the meaning of the Second Amendment,’” Sweeney wrote.
The state has not cited any “historical law treating ordinary, law-abiding young adults like those convicted of a felony or adjudicated as mentally ill — in the context of the right to keep and bear arms or otherwise,” the NRA’s lawyer argued.
“Florida’s age-based ban is not relevantly similar to restrictions imposed after due process. It is inconsistent with Bruen,” Sweeney wrote.
State lawmakers increased the minimum age to purchase long guns to 21 after the February 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland. Federal law already barred sales of handguns to people under 21.
The NRA immediately filed a lawsuit, arguing, in part, that the state age restriction infringes on Second Amendment rights of young adults, who are authorized to use weapons when they serve in the military or in law enforcement.
Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker upheld the law last year, saying that he was following legal precedents. Walker, however, also described the case as falling “squarely in the middle of a constitutional no man’s land.” It remains unclear when the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal will rule in the NRA’s appeal of Walker’s ruling.
–Dara Kam, News Service of Florida
FlaglerLive relies on a strong core of donors. But they’re just a fraction of the 25,000 readers who daily depend on FlaglerLive for reliable, fearless reporting and analysis you cannot get anywhere else. If you’re still on the sidelines, we need you to join the Friends of FlaglerLive today. Elections, storms, the latest catastrophe - when dependable and factual local reporting will be more essential than ever, take a stand for integrity and have a direct voice in fostering serious journalism in your community. As little as $10 makes a difference, or better still, become a monthly donor: Become a "Friend of" FlaglerLive, a 501(c)(3) non-profit news organization. Donations are tax deductible. Think of it as buying a "scoop", in every sense of the term!
Reader Interactions
Comments
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
David Schaefer says
NRA has got to go another right wing establishment.
Jimbo99 says
I figure they would use Selective Service Requirement. If the Government can require this at age 18, anyone should be able to purchase a rifle, regardless of what the spin is that “AR” or “AK” stand for as abbreviations.
“According to law, a man must register with Selective Service within 30 days of his 18th birthday. Selective Service accepts late registrations up until a man reaches his 26th birthday.
Failure to register is a felony and non-registrants may be denied the following benefits for life:
State-based student loans and grant programs in 31 states
Federal job training under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (formerly Workforce Investment Act)
Federal (and many state and local) jobs
Up to a 5-year delay of U.S. citizenship proceedings for immigrants”
That’s Federal law. While I will be the 1st to acknowledge some folks have no business owning a gun. Shouldn’t Selective Service be the same qualification that voluntarily enlisting entails. They don’t let the mentally ill enlist, nor do they take them as drafted. By the way, the last time any legislation was passed, executive order issued was 2015-2016, that happened before Trump was inaugurated, that would be Obama. This is not a Democrat vs Republican thing. If an 18 yo can die for the concept of Freedom & Democracy, the USA, it’s government, etc., shouldn’t they be able to purchase an AR-15 on the same date they are required to be eligible to die for that honor ?
Just a potential perspective. Buying a firearm at age 18, doesn’t necessarily imply there will ever be a crime committed with that firearm. However since Roe v Wade went down, elect to get an abortion, & certainly, a human being will die from that decision. Sometimes this world makes no sense, because those moving the goal posts have their agendas. Another line of thought, many commit suicide with a gun, one can elect an abortion over something like, “can’t afford children/not ready”, but they can’t elect suicide by firearm for the same reason ? That life was too unaffordable & overwhelming ? Just some of the things past, present & future generations will debate.
https://www.sss.gov/register/men-26-and-older/
https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/USCODE-2015-title50/USCODE-2015-title50-chap49-sec3811
Michael Cocchiola says
So, in the NRAosphere, 18-year-olds should be able to legally buy and carry around an AR-15 or an AK-47. And if 18 and up can, what’s to prevent 16-year-olds from doing so? Even younger. After all, they carried muskets in 18th-century America to hunt and protect settlers from Indian attacks. And that’s the NRA’s argument. If it was common practice in 1742, it should be allowed in 2022.
But wait, there’s more. One Republican candidate for office, Texas, I believe, sees no reason why citizens can’t own machine guns, mortars, flame throwers and other weapons of war. He wants to overturn the National Firearms Act of 1934.
We can carry this all to illogical extremes, but the NRA and apparently the conservative majority on the Supreme Court are all about extremes. Under this SCOTUS, civil chaos, even anarchy, is entirely possible.
Bob Fortier says
As a gun owner and veteran I will say this, though I will most likely get beat up by some…
I owned pistols when I was 18 years old for protection and sport…and I lived through it.
When I turned 21 I bought a rifle…eventually several for different sport/uses.
Guess what…I lived.
I am an avid Second Amendment believer, but until the senseless killing from semi-automatic rifles, taking down too many innocent humans ends, let’s give this debate a break and figure things out for now.
Viet Nam Veteran, senior adult, law-abiding citizen, supporter of gun rights.
This is not about guns, this is about the mentality of many under 21, and with age (3 of s0 years) the brain develops significaantly in the majority of cases.
Geezer says
The NRA is up for a Nobel Prize and Donald Trump was voted the most eloquent of all US presidents.
I have a beautiful bridge for sale, engineered by John Roebling, and completed by his son.
It’s a bit old though… Call 1-800-COV-FEFE for an info pack.
Deborah Coffey says
Just how many millions of Americans are Republicans willing to kill in their lust for power and money? How many? But, they want to force every woman to birth babies? So they can then be murdered? Really. Next time I hear Republicans say they are the pro-life party, I’m going to organize a million woman march against them. They hypocrisy alone is so bad, it’s murderous.