A federal judge in West Texas ruled Monday that it was unconstitutional—in absence of a historical precedent—to ban those under felony indictments from buying guns.
After the seven-day waiting period was over, he received the gun. But a few days later, the federal system indicated that the purchase was illegal, and Quiroz was later convicted or purchasing a firearm while under a felony indictment. He appealed the conviction, and Counts ruled in his favor.
In his opinion, the judge acknowledged the “real-world consequences” of the case and valid “public policy and safety concerns,” but said that a precedent had been set by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June.
Historical Precedent
In June, the conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court struck down New York’s concealed carry gun permitting system on constitutional grounds in a 6–3 decision in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. The court ruled that Americans have a constitutional right to carry firearms in public for self-defense.“Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s ‘unqualified command,’” wrote Justice Clarence Thomas in the majority opinion.
But Counts said that he found no historical context for prohibiting gun purchases for those charged but not convicted of felony crimes.
Counts also said that it was unknown “whether a statute preventing a person under indictment from receiving a firearm aligns with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” adding that “this Court does not know the answers; it must only try to faithfully follow Bruen’s framework.”
