Supreme Court declines to examine appeals over Maryland, Rhode Island gun control laws
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear two cases challenging separate state bans on so-called assault weapons and high-capacity magazines on Monday.
The court declined to hear cases arising out of Maryland and Rhode Island relating to state regulations on AR-15-style rifles and high-capacity magazines, respectively. The cases had been submitted to the Supreme Court after lower courts upheld the bans in the face of challenges.
Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch disagreed with the majority's decision and said they would have liked to have reviewed the cases.
With respect to the Maryland ban, the Supreme Court's decision upholds the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling, which states that authority to ban AR-15-style rifles is consistent with the 2nd Amendment.
The 4th Circuit argued in its ruling that granting AR-15s constitutional protection based on their common use would mean that any dangerous weapon "could gain constitutional protection merely because it becomes popular before the government can sufficiently regulate it."
Lawyers arguing against the ban claimed the Supreme Court had a duty to "ensure that the Second Amendment itself is not truncated into a limited right to own certain state-approved means of personal self-defense."
While the court declined to take up the issue in this case, Justice Brett Kavanaugh stated that, "In my view, this Court should and presumably will address the AR-15 issue soon."
Thomas, one of the three justices who sought to review the Maryland case now, was more blunt in his dissent.
"I would not wait to decide whether the government can ban the most popular rifle in America," Thomas wrote. "That question is of critical importance to tens of millions of law-abiding AR-15 owners throughout the country."
The gun cases come as the Supreme Court has been inundated with challenges to President Donald Trump's agenda, from his economic and regulatory policies to his anti-illegal immigration efforts.
The Supreme Court is expected to hand down rulings relating to several of these topics in the coming weeks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Analysis: New South Korean President Lee Jae-mying expected to enact pro-labor bills
June 4 (UPI) -- During May's televised debate ahead of the South Korean presidential election, Democratic Party candidate Lee Jae-myung was asked about the pro-labor "Yellow Envelope Act." Lee, who was elected as the country's 21st state head Tuesday, replied positively about the bill, which is designed to limit employers' damage claims against workers involved in strikes. "The Yellow Envelope Act reflects the Supreme Court's verdicts and is aligned with the International Labor Organization standards. Its legislation is something that should be done obviously," he said. Observers point out that the response amply demonstrates what may lie ahead for Asia's fourth-largest economy under Lee's leadership during the next five years. "President Lee is likely to immediately pursue labor-friendly legislation like the Yellow Envelope Act. In fact, the National Assembly will convene Thursday at the request of the Democratic Party," political commentator Choi Soo-young told UPI. "This means that the Yellow Envelope Act can be passed a day after Lee's inauguration. Under his stewardship, many similar bills are likely to be introduced," he predicted. The Democratic Party, which holds a majority of seats in the country's unicameral parliament, headed the passage of the Yellow Envelope Act twice in 2023 and 2024. Back then, however, former President Yoon Suk-yeol vetoed it as the country's major business associations expressed concerns that the bill might embolden already militant trade unions. Even the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea echoed such a sentiment. In addition to launching labor-friendly policies, experts expected that the new administration would channel funds in a bid to boost the sluggish economy in the short term. "The South Korean economy is feared to grow below the potential growth rate this year due to the lack of demand. The new government will try to deal with this through increased public spending," Sogang University economics professor Kim Young-ick said in a phone interview. "For example, President Lee is projected to proactively implement the local currency system, even if it means incurring a fiscal deficit," Kim said. President Lee has expressed his commitment to promoting local currencies, or vouchers issued by regional governments that are valid only within designated areas, to revitalize the economy. The Bank of Korea nearly halved the country's 2025 growth forecast from 1.5% to 0.8% on Thursday, falling short of its potential growth rate estimated to be around 2%. Over the past three decades, the Korean economy has failed to achieve 1% annual growth only three times: in 1997 amid the Asian financial crisis, in 2009 because of the global financial turmoil, and in 2020 during the virus pandemic. "As a mid- to longer-term goal, President Lee is projected to jack up the country's growth potential by underpinning productivity. One effective approach would be to fully take advantage of artificial intelligence-powered systems," Kim said. Lee Phil-sang, an adviser at Aju Research Institute of Corporate Management and former Seoul National University economics professor, worried that President Lee would come up with populist policies at the expense of the country's fiscal health. "Rather than trying to improve South Korea's economic fundamentals through such measures as deregulation, President Lee is feared to just increase government spending," Lee said. "Such stimulus policies may have a short-term effect. But it would not make a big difference in the long run. Instead, such an approach may result in a steep rise in public debt. I am concerned that President Lee appears indifferent to rising debt," he said. During last month's election campaign, President Lee said that the government should not overly worry about sovereign debt. "There are people saying ignorant things like that the country must never go into debt because the national debt has exceeded $730 billion," he said. "But if the government doesn't spend money during times like this, then when will it ever?" he asked. "Compared to our annual gross domestic product, the government debt is quite low at less than 50%." President Lee also has been a prominent advocate of universal basic income, which is designed to provide all citizens with a guaranteed minimum level of income. During the 2022 election campaign, when former President Yoon defeated then-candidate Lee, the latter proposed an annual payment of around $180 per person with the five-year goal of raising it to $730. At the time, the idea also faced criticisms of its financial feasibility.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
A 'Disgusting Abomination' - CNN This Morning with Audie Cornish - Podcast on CNN Audio
A 'Disgusting Abomination' CNN This Morning 47 mins Elon Musk burned bridges on his way out the White House door, calling the president's agenda a "disgusting abomination." Could his criticism influence some Senate Republicans to vote no? Plus, is the president having buyer's remorse about his picks for the Supreme Court? Also: Household debt is steadily creeping up. Is this a red flag for the economy?
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Walmart fires migrant workers after Supreme Court let Trump strip them of legal status: report
Walmart has begun laying off employees at some of its Florida stores after a recent Supreme Court ruling allowed the Trump administration to revoke legal protections previously extended to hundreds of thousands of migrants. The company has informed staff in at least two locations that continued employment is contingent on obtaining valid work authorization, individuals familiar with the matter told Bloomberg News. The layoffs stem from the expiration of temporary legal residency status, affecting workers who had previously been permitted to live and work in the US under programs established during the Biden administration. Advertisement 3 Walmart has begun laying off employees who no longer have protected migrant status at some of its Florida stores, according to a report. AP These terminations are tied to compliance with federal I-9 forms, which employers must use to verify both the identity and employment authorization of their workers. While the exact number of terminated employees remains unclear, the move is part of a broader wave of corporate responses to a changing legal landscape. Last month, the Walt Disney Company informed some Florida-based employees who are losing temporary legal status that their jobs would be terminated. Advertisement Disney confirmed that it placed 45 workers on leave after the legal ruling, citing compliance with federal immigration laws as the reason. 'We are committed to protecting the health, safety, and well-being of all our employees who may be navigating changing immigration policies and how they could impact them or their families,' Disney said in a statement. The employees are Venezuelan nationals who had been granted Temporary Protected Status. They will continue to receive benefits while on leave, Disney said. Advertisement According to the company, the decision was made to ensure no employees were unknowingly violating US law due to their changing legal status. 3 Venezuelan migrants react after arriving on a deportation flight from the United States in Venezuela on May 9. REUTERS The Supreme Court ruling is likely to affect as many as half a million migrants, including individuals from Venezuela, Haiti, Nicaragua and Cuba. The ruling effectively permits the Trump administration to end temporary protections for these individuals, who had been allowed to enter the US legally and were often integrated into the workforce. Advertisement The Post has sought comment from Walmart. When reached by Bloomberg News, Walmart declined to comment on the staff reductions or provide details about how many workers may be affected across its 4,600 stores nationwide. The company employs approximately 1.6 million workers in the US — the majority of whom are hourly employees working in retail locations. Immigration advocates and local officials in Florida, which has a large immigrant population, have expressed concern over the ramifications of the ruling. Central Florida, which is home to thousands of Venezuelan migrants, has already begun to feel the ripple effects, Bloomberg News reported. 3 A recent Supreme Court ruling allowed the Trump administration to revoke legal protections previously extended to hundreds of thousands of migrants. AP Many residents from that community had backed Donald Trump in the last presidential election, making the impact of the Supreme Court's decision particularly resonant. State Representative Anna Eskamani, a Democrat who is running for mayor of Orlando, criticized the decision. Advertisement 'Disney sets the standard — other companies in our economy look toward them,' she said. 'We don't have enough workers as it is, so this is a bad situation that's getting worse.' Meanwhile, the Trump administration has not yet issued detailed guidance on how it plans to manage the large number of individuals expected to lose their legal status. Immigration enforcement officials have indicated that anyone lacking valid authorization could be subject to arrest and deportation. Advertisement The Trump administration recently launched a campaign to encourage voluntary departures, offering travel assistance and stipends of up to $1,000 to migrants who choose to leave the country on their own. States like Florida are home to many industries that rely heavily on immigrant labor. Labor shortages continue to plague key sectors such as hospitality, construction, and retail.
