Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

Tenth Circuit Sidesteps Bruen with Nonviolent Felon Ruling

Monday, February 24, 2025

Tenth Circuit Sidesteps Bruen with Nonviolent Felon Ruling

As NRA-ILA pointed out last week, the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) has prompted a long-overdue reappraisal of the federal law as it pertains to who can be barred from possessing firearms consistent with the Second Amendment. Unfortunately, it hasn’t been all wins for liberty. Some federal courts have continued to uphold firearm prohibitions that have no relationship to America’s historical tradition.

On February 11, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit rejected a challenge to the 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) federal lifetime prohibition on nonviolent felons possessing firearms.

The case involved Melynda Vincent, a Utah woman who was convicted of federal “bank fraud” in 2008. Noting the particulars, Courthouse News explained, “Vincent wrote a fraudulent check for $498.12 at a grocery store in 2008 when she was homeless and fighting off a drug addiction. She … pleaded guilty and was sentenced to probation without imprisonment.”

In the almost two decades since her conviction, Vincent has turned her life around. An earlier court document noted, “Since the time of her offense Vincent graduated from a drug treatment program, earned an undergraduate degree and two graduate degrees.” Moreover, Courthouse News explained, “Today she is a social worker who runs her own practice and works with the Utah Harm Reduction Coalition.” Any proponents of criminal justice reform more concerned with reintegration than doctrinaire anti-gun politics should find the Vincent’s case compelling.

In ruling against Vincent, the Tenth Circuit cited the circuit’s own precedent from the case U.S. v. McCane (2009) which upheld the broad 18 USC 922(g)(1) prohibition. Of course, that case was decided before Bruen explicitly commanded that the courts look to the text, history, and tradition to determine if a given regulation “is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

The Tenth Circuit declared that since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions after McCane did not “indisputably and pellucidly” abrogate their earlier ruling there was no need to rigorously re-examine circuit precedent or engage in the type of analysis Bruen commanded.

While this result was a reminder that some judges continue to ignore the Supreme Court’s repeated admonition that the Second Amendment is not a second class right, there is reason to be optimistic that there could be a coming shift on this issue.

In September, NRA filed an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit case U.S. v. Duarte, a challenge to the federal lifetime prohibition on firearms possession by nonviolent felons. The brief explained,

America’s historical tradition of firearm regulation allows for the disarmament of dangerous persons—disaffected persons posing a threat to the government and persons with a proven proclivity for violence. But there is no historical tradition of disarming peaceable citizens. Rather,  peaceable citizens—including nonviolent felons and other unvirtuous  persons—were expressly permitted and often required to keep and bear  arms.

Section 922(g)(1) therefore violates the Second Amendment as applied to nonviolent offenders.

Moreover, there are indications that some very prominent jurists are sympathetic to this understanding.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch has repeatedly expressed his dissatisfaction with the widening scope of conduct now classified as felonious and how this deviates from the historical tradition.

The 2021 Supreme Court case Lange v. California involved the question of whether, under the Fourth Amendment, a law enforcement officer may always pursue an individual suspected of having committed a misdemeanor into a home without obtaining a warrant. The Court held that such a categorical exemption to the warrant requirement was impermissible.

During oral arguments there was much discussion on how to treat misdemeanor versus felony conduct in such circumstances. Understanding the creeping expansion of the definition of felony, Gorsuch defended broad Fourth Amendment protections, noting,

we live in a world in which everything has been criminalized. And some professors have even opined that there’s not an American alive who hasn’t committed a felony in some – under some state law.

Gorsuch went on to explain,

what qualified as a felony at common law was -- were very few crimes and they were all punished by the death penalty usually, and today pretty much again anything or everything can be called a felony.

In 2019 U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, then a judge on U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, suggested that firearm possession prohibitions should be tied to dangerousness while dissenting in the case Kanter v. Barr. The case involved the Second Amendment rights of an individual with a felony mail fraud conviction stemming from the almost comically nonviolent crime of selling Medicare non-compliant therapeutic shoe inserts.

Taking issue with the categorical ban on felons possessing firearms, Barrett explained,

History is consistent with common sense: it demonstrates that legislatures have the power to prohibit dangerous people from possessing guns. But that power extends only to people who are dangerous. Founding-era legislatures did not strip felons of the right to bear arms simply because of their status as felons.

Despite this latest setback in the Tenth Circuit, gun owners should be encouraged by much of the federal judiciary’s renewed interest in protecting Second Amendment rights post-Bruen.

TRENDING NOW
U.S. Senate Forced to Remove Pro-Gun Language from Reconciliation Bill

News  

Friday, June 27, 2025

U.S. Senate Forced to Remove Pro-Gun Language from Reconciliation Bill

Today, the U.S. Senate was forced to remove the pro-gun language that had been previously included in the Reconciliation Bill currently making its way through the chamber. We explained in a previous article that this language would, ...

U.S. Senate Adds Pro-Gun Tax Relief Language Back into Reconciliation Bill

News  

Saturday, June 28, 2025

U.S. Senate Adds Pro-Gun Tax Relief Language Back into Reconciliation Bill

Overnight, the U.S. Senate added pro-gun tax relief language back into the Reconciliation bill after the Senate Parliamentarian struck out an earlier provision.  While this new provision is not as expansive as the language we advocated for which ...

U.S. House Passes Reconciliation Bill, Removing Suppressors from the National Firearms Act

News  

Second Amendment  

Thursday, May 22, 2025

U.S. House Passes Reconciliation Bill, Removing Suppressors from the National Firearms Act

Earlier today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R.1 the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which included Section 2 of the Hearing Protection Act, completely removing suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA).

U.S. Court of Appeals Backtracks on Adverse Suppressor Ruling

News  

Monday, June 23, 2025

U.S. Court of Appeals Backtracks on Adverse Suppressor Ruling

In a single sentence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit added to the high-profile and consequential national conversation on firearm suppressors.

North Carolina: Update on Gun Bills Moving through the General Assembly

Tuesday, June 24, 2025

North Carolina: Update on Gun Bills Moving through the General Assembly

Recently, House Bill 193 (H193) was reported favorably out of both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Rules Committee, with amendments.

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down CA’s One-Gun-A-Month Law

Friday, June 20, 2025

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down CA’s One-Gun-A-Month Law

Today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that California’s law prohibiting people from buying more than one firearm in a 30-day period violates the Second Amendment.

News  

Second Amendment  

Friday, June 27, 2025

Joint Statement from Pro-Gun Groups on the Senate Reconciliation Bill

On behalf of millions of NRA members and gun owners, we stand united in calling on Congress to uphold Americans' Second Amendment rights and zero out the NFA's excise tax on suppressors and short-barreled firearms.

Minnesota: Shotgun-Only Hunting Zones Repealed

Friday, June 20, 2025

Minnesota: Shotgun-Only Hunting Zones Repealed

On Monday, June 9th, outside of regular session, the Senate passed the Environment Omnibus bill, removing shotgun-only hunting zones in the state. 

Senate Finance Committee Releases Text of Reconciliation Bill

News  

Monday, June 16, 2025

Senate Finance Committee Releases Text of Reconciliation Bill

Today, the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance released its portion of the Senate version of the Reconciliation Bill. Late last month, the U.S. House passed a version of the Reconciliation Bill which included Section 2 of the ...

Oregon: Omnibus Gun-Control Bill Heads to the Governor's Desk

Friday, June 27, 2025

Oregon: Omnibus Gun-Control Bill Heads to the Governor's Desk

With only two days left in the legislative session, the Oregon legislature has allowed the passage of Senate Bill 243, the gun control omnibus package. SB 243 has been transmitted to Governor Tina Kotek's desk ...

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.