Supreme Court Rejects Trio of Gun Rights Cases
Plus: White House faces battle over EPA rules
By Matt Cantor, Newser User
Posted Feb 24, 2014 12:13 PM CST
The Supreme Court won't hear a handful of gun-law cases.   (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)

(Newser) – In a blow to the NRA, the Supreme Court has opted not to hear a trio of cases challenging federal and state gun laws. Two involved NRA-backed challenges to laws limiting gun rights for people under 21, Reuters reports. One of those was a Texas law banning 18- to 20-year-olds from publicly carrying guns; the other addressed decades-old laws against gun sales to those under 21. A third case involved consumers' ability to challenge gun-sale laws. The high court didn't offer comment on its rejection of the cases, the AP notes. In other court news:

  • Justices rejected an alleged drug lord's appeal against a Virginia retrial for capital murder. Justin Wolfe's initial conviction was overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct.
  • Nor will justices hear an appeal by a man who was convicted under federal gambling laws. Lawrence DiCristina of New York says the laws cover only games of chance, whereas the game his underground group plays—poker—is about skill.
  • So what is the court hearing? Arguments are taking place today over an Obama administration rule on pollution. The EPA requires companies developing pollution-boosting industrial sites to assess their carbon output. The Chamber of Commerce, which is challenging the measure along with some GOP-run states, says it "may be the costliest, most intrusive regulatory program the nation has yet seen." Several other states, as well as environmental groups, are backing the White House.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
Supreme Court Rejects Trio of Gun Rights Cases is...
1%
7%
12%
43%
12%
26%
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Comments
Showing 3 of 94 comments
turning fifty3
Feb 27, 2014 7:45 PM CST
Actually, the best argument for sane restrictions on gun is the Constitution itself. As the preamble makes clear, the purpose of the constitution is "to insure domestic tranquility." A professor at Biola University lays out the case pretty well, and also addresses Christians who think that the Bible supports unrestricted access to guns. Check out his argument on Thegoodbookblog at Talbot School of Theology (Biola University). It is by Hubbard, and is entitled "See the Welfare of the City: The Biblical Argument for Gun Control." Pretty convincing--and controversial from the comments. He has a couple posts on the subject. Here's the link to the first post if anyone is interested: http://thegoodbookblog.com/2013/nov/18/seek-the-welfare-of-the-city-the-biblical-argument/
Mahmood Saleem
Feb 25, 2014 1:23 PM CST
The court is not going to take on such narrow cases but will probably take on a case that will address the splits at the lower level courts regarding 2A rights outside the home i http://www.consumerspk.com/category/mobile-companies-cases/
FarmerMichael
Feb 24, 2014 11:37 PM CST
"A blow to the NRA?" How does one arrive at that conclusion? It is like a trick or treater being told "no" after already getting a full bag of candy from law makers who want to keep their campaign chests full..