A federal judge ruled in favor of a Kansas man Friday who possessed a machine gun, dismissing the defendant’s charges and deeming them unconstitutional.
Prosecutors charged the defendant, Tamori Morgan, with two counts of illegally possessing a machine gun, according to court documents. The law – 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) – says, “it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun.”
Judge John Broomes, a Trump-appointee, ruled the ban unconstitutional.
Prosecutors charged Morgan with possessing an Anderson Manufacturing, model AM-15 .300 caliber machine gun along with a “Glock switch”– a device that enables a Glock to fire like an automatic weapon – according to court documents.
Broomes said it was the government’s burden to prove there was a historical analogue to support the charges against Morgan.
The Supreme Court previously ruled in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen that restrictions were constitutional if U.S. history had a tradition of said regulation.
New York requires individuals to show a “special need” to receive an unrestricted concealed carry license. The Supreme Court ruled that publicly carrying a firearm for self-defense purposes has a longstanding historical tradition in America.
Congress attempted to regulate machine guns with the National Firearms Act in 1934 and prohibited the possession of them in 1986. Prosecutors argued Tamori’s weapons were not covered under the Second Amendment.
Broomes sharply disagreed, stating they are protected “within the original meaning of the amendment.” He said the government failed to justify the law’s application in this case.
All federal gun laws (and under the Leftist attempts to make all state laws agree with federal, state laws) should be considered unconstitutional. It is a fundamental right, and interestingly enough, 18 USC 922 has been hit TWICE in different federal districts.
I’m here for it… pic.twitter.com/JFBhgHTDzW
— Kyle Seraphin (@KyleSeraphin) August 23, 2024
The Department of Justice (DOJ) can choose to appeal the ruling.
I don’t know why anyone would want a machine gun but it’s his right I guess. Just keep it in his collection safely locked away.
I have far less fear of a fellow citizen who owns a machine gun than I have of federal agencies that are not mentioned in the Consitution.
What bothers me most is how dedicated to removing all fire arms from the citizens the demorats are! Strange how they change definitions to cover up their illegal unconstitutional acts to disarm the citizens yet still get away with even more restrictions on our Second amendment rights.
FREE CRS NOW.