holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
In a major ruling out of the Southern District of Mississippi, Judge Carlton Reeves has struck down the federal machine gun ban as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The case, United States v. Brown, follows the framework established by the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires gun laws to be justified by historical tradition.
The government’s response was predictable: It argued that machine guns fall under the Heller-established category of “dangerous and unusual” weapons, which courts have long held are not protected by the Second Amendment. However, Judge Reeves rejected this argument, reasoning that while machine guns are certainly dangerous, the government failed to prove they are unusual. His ruling pointed to the fact that over 740,000 machine guns are legally owned in the United States today—a significant number that undermines the idea that they are outside the scope of common use.
One of the most significant flaws in the government’s argument is the circular reasoning behind the idea that machine guns are “unusual.”
Machine guns are rare because of federal bans enacted during the 20th century.
Since this is a criminal case, the ruling only applies to Justin Bryce Brown. It does not overturn § 922(o) nationwide, and it does not mean new machine guns will suddenly become legal. However, the case has broader implications: If the ruling is appealed and upheld, it could trigger more challenges to the National Firearms Act and other federal gun restrictions, including regulations on suppressors and short-barreled rifles. Either way, this case is far from over. The Fifth Circuit and possibly the Supreme Court may eventually address the fundamental issue at play: Whether machine guns can be considered “dangerous and unusual” when their rarity is a direct result of government restrictions.
www.thefirearmblog.com
The Court’s Reasoning in United States v. Brown
The defendant, Justin Bryce Brown, was charged with unlawful possession of a machine gun under 18 U.S.C. § 922(o). His argument was that, under Bruen, the statute is unconstitutional as applied to him.The government’s response was predictable: It argued that machine guns fall under the Heller-established category of “dangerous and unusual” weapons, which courts have long held are not protected by the Second Amendment. However, Judge Reeves rejected this argument, reasoning that while machine guns are certainly dangerous, the government failed to prove they are unusual. His ruling pointed to the fact that over 740,000 machine guns are legally owned in the United States today—a significant number that undermines the idea that they are outside the scope of common use.
One of the most significant flaws in the government’s argument is the circular reasoning behind the idea that machine guns are “unusual.”
Machine guns are rare because of federal bans enacted during the 20th century.
- Because they are rare, the government argues they can be banned.
- And because they are banned, they remain rare.
What Happens Next?
If Brown is appealed, it will go to the Fifth Circuit, which is the most conservative federal appellate court in the country. That is important because, while the Fifth Circuit has been aggressive in striking down gun restrictions post-Bruen, it has also previously ruled against machine gun protections.Since this is a criminal case, the ruling only applies to Justin Bryce Brown. It does not overturn § 922(o) nationwide, and it does not mean new machine guns will suddenly become legal. However, the case has broader implications: If the ruling is appealed and upheld, it could trigger more challenges to the National Firearms Act and other federal gun restrictions, including regulations on suppressors and short-barreled rifles. Either way, this case is far from over. The Fifth Circuit and possibly the Supreme Court may eventually address the fundamental issue at play: Whether machine guns can be considered “dangerous and unusual” when their rarity is a direct result of government restrictions.
Federal Court Declares Machine Gun Ban Unconstitutional
In a major ruling out of the Southern District of Mississippi, Judge Carlton Reeves has struck down the federal machine gun ban as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.The case, United States v.Brown, follows the framework established by the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol...
www.thefirearmblog.com
