Audio By Carbonatix
A U.S. appeals court upheld a federal law that bars migrants who are in the United States illegally from possessing guns, rejecting arguments by a Mexican man convicted of unlawfully having a handgun that the ban was unconstitutional.
A three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said on Tuesday that the ban was still valid even after recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that have expanded gun rights by requiring firearms restrictions to be in keeping with the nation's history and tradition.
The panel said those Supreme Court rulings did not unequivocally undermine an earlier decision by the 5th Circuit holding that the plain text of the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment does not encompass immigrants in the county illegally.
"We should not extend rights to illegal aliens any further than what the law requires," U.S. Circuit Judge James Ho, a conservative appointee of Republican former President Donald Trump, wrote in a concurring opinion.
The ruling came in an appeal by Jose Paz Medina-Cantu, who had been arrested by U.S. Border Patrol agents in Texas in 2022 and charged with illegally possessing a handgun and unlawfully re-entering the country after being previously deported.
Medina-Cantu pleaded guilty and was sentenced last year to 15 months in prison, but he preserved the right to argue on appeal that the gun charge violated his right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment.
His lawyers based their argument on a landmark 2022 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority that established a new test for assessing whether modern firearm restrictions comply with the Second Amendment.
The court's ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen required gun regulations to be "consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation." Many laws have been declared invalid following that decision.
Medina-Cantu's lawyers argued the ruling likewise undermined a 2011 decision by the 5th Circuit upholding the immigration-related ban as there was no historical tradition dating back to around when the Second Amendment was adopted in 1791 of disarming people based solely on their immigration status.
But the three-judge panel said the Supreme Court's recent rulings on gun rights "did not unequivocally abrogate our precedent that the plain text of the Second Amendment does not encompass illegal aliens."
Medina-Cantu's lawyers did not respond to requests for comment.
Latest Stories
-
‘At the age of 12, I was teaching people and collecting money from them’ – Forty Under 40 Awards
39 minutes -
I broke my virginity at the age of 26 after university – Richard Abbey Jnr.
1 hour -
Sacked for fees, saved by faith: The untold story of Forty Under 40 Awards founder Richard Abbey Jnr
2 hours -
GCB Bank surges GH¢0.45, ETI gains GH¢0.06 as GSE ends week higher
2 hours -
Two teens jailed 55 years for robbery
3 hours -
UDS demands apology for MPhil student wrongly branded as Tamale robber
3 hours -
“We don’t sell fish!” – Tema Shipyard CEO hits back over dead fish discovery
4 hours -
Sam George defends anti-LGBTQ+ Bill as ‘national priority’ amid debate over gov’t focus
4 hours -
Artemis II astronauts safely back on Earth after trip around moon
5 hours -
Sam George unveils massive 1,150-cell site rollout to end network woes
5 hours -
This Saturday on Prime Insight: Fuel levy suspension, LGBTQ+ legislation, and Damang Mine controversy
6 hours -
Struggling Real suffer title blow with Girona draw
6 hours -
Mahama nominates Pamela Graham as Auditor-General
6 hours -
The five big sticking points in US-Iran talks
7 hours -
Melania Trump’s speech propels Epstein crisis back to forefront
8 hours