Connect with us

Politics

Judge rules illegal immigrants have gun rights protected by 2nd Amendment

Published

on

Judge rules illegal immigrants have gun rights protected by 2nd Amendment

Join Fox News for access to this content

Plus special access to select articles and other premium content with your account – free of charge.

Please enter a valid email address.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

Having trouble? Click here.

A federal judge in Illinois has found that the Constitution protects the gun rights of noncitizens who enter the United States illegally.

U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman on Friday ruled that a federal prohibition on illegal immigrants owning firearms is unconstitutional as applied to defendant Heriberto Carbajal-Flores. The court found that while the federal ban is “facially constitutional,” there is no historical tradition of firearm regulation that permits the government to deprive a noncitizen who has never been convicted of a violent crime from exercising his Second Amendment rights.

Advertisement

“The noncitizen possession statute … violates the Second Amendment as applied to Carbajal-Flores,” the judge wrote. “Thus, the Court grants Carbajal-Flores’ motion to dismiss.”

Coleman, a President Obama appointee, cited the landmark Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), which established a new standard to determine whether a law violates the Second Amendment. Since Bruen, a multitude of federal and state gun control measures have been challenged in courts with mixed results. 

DELAWARE BILL REQUIRING GUN BUYERS TO BE FINGERPRINTED, TRAINED, SET TO BECOME LAW

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” (iStock)

In this case, U.S. v. Carbajal-Flores, the court considered whether people who enter the country illegally can be banned from owning firearms.

Advertisement

Carbajal-Flores is an illegal immigrant who, on June 1, 2020, was found to be in possession of a handgun in the Little Village neighborhood of Chicago. He was subsequently charged with violating a federal law that prohibits any noncitizen who is not legally authorized to be in the U.S. from “possess[ing] in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.” 

In an April 2022 decision, Coleman denied Carbajal-Flores’ first motion to dismiss his indictment, finding that the ban was constitutional. However, Carbajal-Flores asked the court to reconsider that ruling following the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen and appellate decisions in the Third and Seventh Circuit that considered whether people convicted of non-violent crimes can be prohibited from possessing firearms. 

CONGRESS POISED TO ROLL BACK ‘VETERAN GUN BAN,’ WITH RELUCTANT BIDEN BACKING

U.S. District Judge Sharon J. Coleman presents award to attorney Paula E. Litt

U.S. District Judge Sharon J. Coleman, left, presents an award for Excellence in Pro Bono and Public Interest Service to attorney Paula E. Litt, on May 1, 2019. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division)

Upon review, Coleman concluded that Carbajal-Flores’ illegally present status was not sufficient to deny him Second Amendment rights. The judge said the “plain text” of the Constitution “presumptively protects firearms possession by undocumented persons.” 

“Carbajal-Flores has never been convicted of a felony, a violent crime, or a crime involving the use of a weapon. Even in the present case, Carbajal-Flores contends that he received and used the handgun solely for self-protection and protection of property during a time of documented civil unrest in the Spring of 2020,” the judge wrote. “Additionally, Pretrial Service has confirmed that Carbajal-Flores has consistently adhered to and fulfilled all the stipulated conditions of his release, is gainfully employed, and has no new arrests or outstanding warrants.”

Advertisement

The court determined that because there is insufficient evidence to suggest Carbajal-Flores is a danger to society, there is no historical analogue that would permit the federal government to deny him his gun rights. 

NRA SLAMS BIDEN’S SOTU SPEECH AS ATTACK ON ‘THE VERY FABRIC OF AMERICAN FREEDOM’

Gun store customer

A federal judge in Illinois has ruled that the Second Amendment protects the gun rights of illegal immigrants. (Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“The Court finds that Carbajal-Flores’ criminal record, containing no improper use of a weapon, as well as the non-violent circumstances of his arrest do not support a finding that he poses a risk to public safety such that he cannot be trusted to use a weapon responsibly and should be deprived of his Second Amendment right to bear arms in self-defense,” Judge Coleman wrote. “Thus, this Court finds that, as applied to Carbajal-Flores, Section 922(g)(5) is unconstitutional.”

The ruling has divided gun rights activists, with some arguing that noncitizens should not have rights protected by the Constitution.

Erich Pratt, senior vice president of Gun Owners of America (GOA), told Fox News Digital his group “has historically recognized the dangers unchecked illegal immigration presents, chiefly of which is a serious potential to swing the balance of power into the hands of anti-gun politicians.” 

Advertisement

Pratt reiterated GOA does not support amnesty for illegal immigrants. 

“In this underlying ruling, the Second Amendment community undoubtedly has mixed feelings, because while illegal aliens are most certainly not part of ‘the People,’ everyone has a God-given right to defend themselves against violent acts like rape and murder,” he said. 

“Of course, the courts wouldn’t have to decide this question if Joe Biden and the Democratic Party would simply secure our borders.”

Advertisement

Politics

Columbia University’s policy-making senate votes for resolution calling to investigate school’s leadership

Published

on

Columbia University’s policy-making senate votes for resolution calling to investigate school’s leadership

The Columbia University Senate in New York City voted in favor of a resolution calling for an investigation into the school’s leadership amid anti-Israel protests that have taken place on the campus for over a week.

A source within the school’s leadership confirmed the details of the resolution, saying it was adopted by a vote of 62-14, with three senate members abstaining.

The resolution alleges Columbia President Minouche Shafik violated established protocols when she authorized the New York City Police Department (NYPD) to enter the campus and arrest protesters last week.

Specifically, Shafik is accused of violating the due process rights of students and faculty when she authorized officers to enter the campus.

COLUMBIA STUDENT BANNED FROM CAMPUS AFTER REMARKS ABOUT ‘MURDERING ZIONISTS’

Advertisement

Columbia University President Minouche Shafik leaves the Low Memorial Library on the campus of Columbia University April 24, 2024, in New York City. (Fox News Digital)

The university senate does not have the authority to remove Shafik, as it is the university’s policy-making body, which is made up of students, faculty and administrators.

“The administration and Senate share the same goal of restoring calm to campus, so everyone can pursue their educational activities,” the university said. “We are committed to an ongoing dialogue and appreciate the Senate’s constructive engagement in finding a pathway forward.”

Shafik has increasingly faced calls to step down amid the spread of antisemitism on campus as well as ongoing protests against Israel that have disrupted classes. 

HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ACCEPTED TO COLUMBIA SAYING ‘NO THANK YOU’ DUE TO ANTISEMITISM: COLLEGE CONSULTANT

Advertisement
Pro-Palestinian supporters rally outside Columbia University

Anti-Israel agitators rally outside Columbia University April 23, 2024, in New York City. (Jeenah Moon/Getty Images)

On Monday, Shafik said in a statement she was “deeply saddened” by certain actions of agitators, who have formed an “encampment” on the campus and riled up students and faculty with anti-Jewish slogans and chants. 

The protest encampment sprung up on the campus lawn area at Columbia April 17, the same day Shafik faced bruising criticism at a congressional hearing from Republicans who said she hadn’t done enough to fight antisemitism. Two other Ivy League presidents resigned months ago following widely criticized testimony they gave to the same committee. 

U.S. House Republicans from New York have urged Shafik to resign, saying in a letter Monday she had failed to provide a safe learning environment in recent days as “anarchy has engulfed the campus.”

Fox News’ CB Cotton and Bradford Betz contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

Granderson: Arizona's indictment of Trump allies follows a sordid, racist history

Published

on

Granderson: Arizona's indictment of Trump allies follows a sordid, racist history

I’ve lived and/or worked in 10 states scattered across the country. Arizona was and remains the most complicated. The same state that elected the first openly gay mayor of a large U.S. city is also the state that did not want a federal holiday for Martin Luther King Jr.

Opinion Columnist

LZ Granderson

LZ Granderson writes about culture, politics, sports and navigating life in America.

Advertisement

Perhaps the cultural pendulum swings so drastically because the population shifts depending on the time of year — shoutout to you snowbirds.

Whatever the season, though, Arizona is not a liberal epicenter like New York. To get news like we saw this week — where an Arizona grand jury indicted 18 allies of Donald Trump, including Mark Meadows and Rudolph W. Giuliani, over their efforts to overturn the 2020 election — takes more than dislike of Trump or Republicans.

It takes facts.

And it should be no surprise to find that kind of evidence in Arizona, where election denial arises from a long history of other racist power grabs.

Advertisement

Let’s think back to 2020 in Arizona, even before the election drama. This was the same year when Scottsdale City Council member Guy Phillips, appearing at an anti-mask rally, made a joke with the dying words of George Floyd as police killed him: “I can’t breathe.”

That kind of brazen racism is not unique for the area.

Scottsdale is a former sundown town that is nearly 90% white. Black people made up less than 2% of the population.

After pushback Phillips apologized, blaming the remarks on adrenaline, whatever that means. As if resisting mask requirements required a teaspoon of racism to be effective.

At the time of his remarks, my family had just moved to the Phoenix suburb, and I was beginning to think we had made a terrible mistake. On multiple occasions I was called the N word by drivers in pickup trucks with large Trump flags flapping from them.

Advertisement

Overt racism played well with a lot of voters. Months after mocking Floyd’s death, Phillips not only made it out of the primary but also ended up dangerously close to being reelected. Colton Duncan, Republican Kari Lake’s campaign manager when she ran for governor, retweeted a racist post about Native Americans on Indigenous Peoples Day in 2022. Lake herself has talked about going to war with Mexico over the migrant crisis. This year she is leaning into the racist “replacement theory” rhetoric as she runs for Senate against Rep. Ruben Gallego.

She launched her campaign in Scottsdale, by the way.

That’s not to suggest all of Maricopa County is filled with people who are racists. Only that the largest county in the state has a lot of them. Enough to sustain political careers of people who have said and done some vile things. This is the state that gave us Sen. Barry Goldwater, who opposed the Civil Rights Act. Arizona also attempted to pass “show me your papers” legislation.

It’s a cloud that continues to hang over the area, a constant reminder that how far we’ve come is not nearly far enough. And underneath that cloud of racial grievance, a group of citizens chose to make a stand for Trump, the king of racial grievances. It’s little wonder out of all the states to challenge the election results, no state worked harder through multiple recounts and lawsuits than Arizona. In fact, Lake still suggests the election was stolen even after the indictments reiterate that simply is not true.

What has been true is Arizona politics swinging between the unacceptable and the remarkable. After it was discovered the mayor of Tempe was gay, recall efforts were kicked into high gear. One of the key people to help fight them off? Republican Sen. John McCain — who resisted having out LGBTQ+ members in the military.

Advertisement

From the outside that makes little sense. But after living in Arizona, and witnessing the constant tug-of-war between progressive and conservative policies, the one thing that is clear is neither political philosophy defines the state. There is hatred, there is love, and then there is truth. The indictments may be characterized as a liberal attempt to punish Trump. It’s not that simple. Arizona isn’t liberal or conservative. The same goes for these indictments.

@LZGranderson

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Tennessee Gov. Lee signs bill allowing concealed carry for public schoolteachers

Published

on

Tennessee Gov. Lee signs bill allowing concealed carry for public schoolteachers

Tennessee teachers and staff will be allowed to carry concealed handguns on public school grounds under legislation signed into law by Gov. Bill Lee on Friday.

Lee, a Republican, had announced his support for the proposal just the day before while flanked by top Republican legislative leaders who had helped shepherd the bill through the GOP-dominant General Assembly.

“What’s important is that we give districts tools and the option to use a tool that will keep their children safe,” Lee told reporters.

TENNESSEE NEARS LAW BANNING ADULTS FROM HELPING MINORS FIND, RECEIVE SEX REASSIGNMENT CARE

As the idea of arming teachers began to gain support inside the General Assembly, gun control advocates and families began swarming to the Capitol to show their opposition. During the final vote, protesters chanted “Blood on your hands” and many members of the public who oppose the bill harangued Republican lawmakers after the vote, leading House Speaker Cameron Sexton to order the galleries cleared.

Advertisement

FILE – Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee responds to questions during a news conference Tuesday, April 11, 2023, in Nashville, Tenn. (AP Photo/George Walker IV, File)

According to the statute, which becomes effective immediately, parents and other teachers will be barred from knowing who is armed at their schools.

A principal, school district and law enforcement agency would have to agree to let staff carry guns, and then workers who want to carry a handgun would need to have a handgun carry permit and written authorization from the school’s principal and local law enforcement. They would also need to clear a background check and undergo 40 hours of handgun training. They couldn’t carry guns at school events at stadiums, gymnasiums or auditoriums.

The legislation is the biggest expansion of gun access in the state since last year’s deadly shooting at a private elementary school in Nashville where shooter indiscriminately opened fire and killed three children and three adults before being killed by police.

Lee initially asked lawmakers to keep guns away from people deemed a danger to themselves or others in response to the shooting, the Republican supermajority ignored that request.

Advertisement

Many of the Covenant families had met with Lee and lawmakers hoping to persuade them to drop the idea of arming teachers. In the final days of the legislative session, Covenant families said they had collected nearly 4,300 signatures from Tennesseans against having public school staffers carry weapons on school grounds.

“There are folks across the state who disagree on the way forward, but we all agree that we should keep our kids safe,” Lee said Thursday.

It’s unclear if any school districts would take advantage if the bill becomes law. For example, a Metro Nashville Public Schools spokesperson, Sean Braisted, said the district believes “it is best and safest for only approved active-duty law enforcement to carry weapons on campus.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending