New Mexico gun possession statute withstands constitutional challenge
Guns are shown at Caso's Gun-A-Rama in Jersey City, New Jersey, which has been open since 1967. (Photo by Aristide Economopoulos / NJ Monitor)
The New Mexico Court of Appeals this week rejected a challenge to state law prohibiting people convicted of felonies in the past decade from possessing firearms.
A jury convicted Jeremy Romero, of Las Vegas, of unlawfully possessing a firearm and evading Albuquerque police in August 2022, and a judge sentenced him to eight years in prison.
A few days later, he challenged the felon-in-posession statute's constitutionality, arguing that it violates his Second Amendment right to possess a gun.
In a unanimous opinion published on Wednesday, a three-judge panel at the New Mexico Court of Appeals ruled that the law stands because there's a long history of Congress and state legislatures disarming people who are a danger to others, so the law itself is constitutional.
In court briefings and at oral arguments in February, Romero's attorney argued that his prior convictions were for nonviolent offenses, so it was unconstitutional to apply the felon-in-possession statute against him.
Mary Barket, Romero's public defender, also argued that the country's historical prohibitions on gun possession weren't similar enough to New Mexico's law because they targeted groups during times of war and conflict 'that posed an existential threat to the ruling government.'
'I do not think that that is similar to why we're trying to justify disarming felons, both violent and nonviolent,' Barket told the judges.
The judges weren't convinced, and ruled that Romero did not challenge the trial court's findings that he is dangerous based on his criminal history of possessing and selling drugs and escape from house arrest, so the law is also constitutional as it was applied to him.
While the ruling does not create any new rule about what's needed to prove that someone is dangerous, it does require that for the government to constitutionally apply the felon-in-possession statute to someone, prosecutors 'must demonstrate that the defendant presents a threat to others,' the judges wrote.
Romero based his challenge on the legal standard established by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 for analyzing the constitutionality of firearms regulations, in a case called Bruen.
Nonprofit news organization The Trace reviewed more than 2,000 court cases that cited Bruen and found that people whose felony records bar them from possessing guns used the decision more often than any other group.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Operation Spider's Web: Germany estimates that Ukraine damaged 10% of Russian strategic aircraft
Ukraine's drone attack on Russian airfields on 1 June probably damaged about 10% of Russia's strategic bomber fleet, German Major General Christian Freuding has said. Source: Freuding in a podcast, as reported by European Pravda, citing Reuters Quote: "According to our assessment, more than a dozen aircraft were damaged, TU-95 and TU-22 strategic bombers as well as A-50 surveillance planes." Details: According to the general, who coordinates Berlin's military assistance to Kyiv and works closely with the Ukrainian Defence Ministry, the A-50s, which have a similar function to NATO's AWACS aircraft in providing air surveillance, were probably not in working order. "We believe that they can no longer be used for spare parts. This is a loss, as only a handful of these aircraft exist," he said. "As for the long-range bomber fleet, 10% of it has been damaged in the attack according to our assessment," Freuding added. The United States estimates that the daring Ukrainian drone attack hit up to 20 Russian warplanes, destroying about 10 of them, two US officials told Reuters. Experts say it will take Moscow years to replace the affected aircraft. Despite the losses, Freuding sees no immediate reduction in Russian strikes on Ukraine, noting that Moscow still retains 90% of its strategic bombers, which can launch ballistic and cruise missiles in addition to dropping bombs. "But there is, of course, an indirect effect as the remaining planes will need to fly more sorties, meaning they will be worn out faster, and, most importantly, there is a huge psychological impact," he said. Freuding said that Russia felt secure in its vast territory, which also explains why the aircraft were not well protected. "After this successful operation, this no longer holds true. Russia will need to ramp up the security measures," the general said. Background: On 1 June 2025, the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) carried out a special operation codenamed Pavutyna ("Spider's Web"), hitting Russian strategic jets at four airfields. SSU head Vasyl Maliuk stated that 34% of strategic cruise missile carriers at Russia's main airfields had been destroyed. The SSU said the estimated cost of the equipment destroyed as a result of Operation Spider's Web is over US$7 billion. A senior NATO official called the operation the most successful one yet. The Alliance estimated that at least 40 aircraft were damaged. Between 10 and 13 aircraft were completely destroyed. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has emphasised that the security services used exclusively Ukrainian weapons in this operation and did not use equipment from allied warehouses. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Ukraine used only domestic drones in Operation Spiderweb, Zelensky says
Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) used exclusively domestically produced drones and did not deploy any equipment from allied stockpiles in its recent attack on Russian heavy bombers, President Volodymyr Zelensky told ABC News in an interview published on June 7. "I wanted very much to use only what we produce and to have the separation (be) very clear," Zelensky said, as quoted by the TV network. On June 1, Ukraine launched a game-changing drone attack on four Russian military airfields, damaging 41 planes, including heavy bombers and rare A-50 spy planes, now largely known as Operation Spiderweb. The Kyiv Independent could not independently confirm the number of planes allegedly damaged and destroyed by the SBU. At least 21 planes were damaged or destroyed, according to open-source intelligence analysts. Kyiv has claimed it had disabled 34% of Russia's strategic bomber fleet in what is seen as one of the most daring operations during the full-scale war. To do so, Ukraine used one of the cheapest weapons already used on the battlefield — first-person-view (FPV) drones. Since the start of the full-scale invasion, Ukraine has been developing and deploying technological innovations and cutting-edge unmanned systems. Both Ukraine and Russia have increasingly relied on drone warfare, using aerial, naval, and ground-based drones for reconnaissance and combat missions. In late March, presidential advisor Alexander Kamyshin said in an interview with Radio Khartia that Ukrainian manufacturers have the capacity to produce over 5 million FPV drones per year. A year-and-a-half in the planning, and reportedly personally overseen by SBU Chief Vasyl Malyuk and Zelensky, Operation Spiderweb was an "absolutely unique operation," according to the president. According to the SBU, the drones were smuggled into Russia, where they were then hidden on the roofs of wooden cabins, which were then transported by truck to the air bases being targeted. When they reached their destinations, the roofs were retracted remotely, and the drones simply flew off towards the Russian bombers. In the interview with ABC News released on June 7, Zelesnky said truck drivers who transported the drones did not know anything about their role in the attack. "They didn't know anything," Zelensky said. "They just did their job." Read also: Operation Spiderweb — everything we know about Ukraine's 'audacious' attack on Russia's heavy bombers We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Newsweek
2 days ago
- Newsweek
How Veteran's Benefits Are Impacted by Trump's Tax Bill: What to Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. President Donald Trump's legislative agenda continues to reshape federal spending, with House Republicans proposing a $453 billion bill for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in fiscal year 2026. While the bill preserves core benefit increases for veterans, it introduces a series of controversial provisions that could change how some services are accessed and funded. The new spending proposals, part of the One Big Beautiful Bill passed by the House in May, come amid a flurry of changes at the VA, including staffing cuts at the department, which have sparked protests across the nation. Why It Matters Veterans' programs have historically received bipartisan support and consistent funding increases. Trump's proposed budget continues that trend, with an $83 billion boost over the prior year, largely for mandatory medical care and benefits payouts. However, the bill's inclusion of policy items tied to reproductive health, firearm access, and vaccine mandates could limit or reshape access to VA services. What to Know The VA budget includes: A 22 percent—$83 billion—overall funding increase , with nearly all new funding earmarked for medical care and mandatory benefits like disability payments. , with nearly all new funding earmarked for medical care and mandatory benefits like disability payments. Discretionary program funding up by 4 percent , rising to approximately $134 billion. , rising to approximately $134 billion. $2.5 billion for the VA's Electronic Health Record Modernization program , doubling the prior year's allocation but still $1 billion short of the White House's ask. , doubling the prior year's allocation but still $1 billion short of the White House's ask. $18 billion in military construction funding, which includes $830 million for child development centers and barracks improvements. Policy changes include: A ban on abortion services and abortion-related counseling at VA facilities, unless the life of the mother is in danger. at VA facilities, unless the life of the mother is in danger. Ending the requirement for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for VA health personnel. for VA health personnel. Restrictions on reporting veterans deemed financially incompetent to the national gun background check system, which Republicans have framed as a defense of Second Amendment rights. Democrats criticized the latter provisions. Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Democrat, said in a statement the bill "needlessly fixates on keeping guns in the hands of those who are potentially a danger to themselves or others, and restricts reproductive rights." A stock image shows a U.S. flag patch on a soldier's uniform. A stock image shows a U.S. flag patch on a soldier's uniform. GETTY What People Are Saying House Appropriations Committee chairman Tom Cole said the bill "honors our commitment to those who've worn America's uniform and supports our military and their loved ones." "By providing critical funding for military bases and improving housing for our troops and their families, we are ensuring that our national defense needs are met both at home and abroad. We are also upholding our pledge to our veterans. This bill fully funds health care and benefits for those who have honorably served. They upheld their sacred oath to us—and now a grateful nation is keeping our promise to them. Today marks the start of our process and our work to fund the government. As this bill moves forward and considerations are made and debated, the pillars of the proposal won't change." Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a statement: "This bill needlessly fixates on keeping guns in the hands of those who are potentially a danger to themselves or others, and restricts reproductive rights, and [includes] other cruel and pointless policy restrictions. I cannot tell those currently serving and those who defended our nation that this is the best we can do." What's Next The bill faces a tougher showdown in the Senate than it did in the House, where Democratic opposition and the filibuster rule will require bipartisan cooperation in order for it to pass.
