Big news is unfolding in the fight for Second Amendment rights. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s Department of Justice (DOJ) has asked the Supreme Court for an additional 30 days to decide whether to seek certiorari (cert) in Range v. Garland—a case that could have major implications for the rights of non-violent felons to own firearms.
The Case at Hand: Range v. Garland
At the heart of this case is Brian Range, a Pennsylvania man convicted decades ago of a minor, non-violent misdemeanor related to food stamp fraud. Under federal law—18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1)—anyone convicted of a felony, or in some cases even certain misdemeanors, is barred from possessing firearms for life.
Range challenged this restriction, arguing that it violates his Second Amendment rights. In a major pro-gun ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit agreed, finding that individuals without a history of violence should not automatically lose their constitutional right to bear arms. This decision contradicts other circuit rulings, setting the stage for a potential Supreme Court showdown.
Why the DOJ is Delaying
Some might see the DOJ’s request for a 30-day extension as bad news, but it’s more likely a strategic move. Here’s why:
- New Leadership at DOJ – Trump’s pick for Solicitor General, John Sauer, is awaiting Senate confirmation. This case is high-stakes, and the administration may want to wait for their preferred legal team to take the reins before making a final decision.
- Watching Other Gun Cases – The Supreme Court is currently considering other major Second Amendment cases, including challenges to assault weapon bans (Bianchi v. Brown out of Maryland). The DOJ might be waiting to see how SCOTUS handles those cases before deciding on Range.
- Legal Bandwidth Issues – The DOJ is handling multiple high-profile cases, including litigation involving Trump and executive power. This could simply be a matter of workload.
- A Potential ‘Windsor’ Strategy – Some speculate that the Trump administration might follow the Obama DOJ’s strategy in United States v. Windsor (a case about same-sex marriage). In that case, Obama’s DOJ argued the law in question was unconstitutional—even though they continued enforcing it for procedural reasons. The Trump DOJ could take a similar approach in Range, asking the Supreme Court to hear the case while ultimately arguing in favor of Range’s gun rights.
What Happens Next?
If the DOJ seeks cert, the Supreme Court could take up Range and issue a definitive ruling on whether non-violent felons can be permanently disarmed. If the DOJ declines to appeal, the Third Circuit’s ruling would stand, but the issue could still resurface in another circuit, potentially forcing the Supreme Court to weigh in later.
Why This Matters
For gun owners and Second Amendment supporters, Range v. Garland is a crucial case. A Supreme Court ruling could reshape how felon-in-possession laws are applied, potentially restoring gun rights to millions of Americans who pose no threat to public safety. With the Trump administration navigating its approach, this could be a defining moment for 2A policy under the current government.
Stay tuned—the next 30 days could determine the future of Second Amendment rights for non-violent felons across the nation.
Major Case Movement in Non-Violent Felons Reclaiming Their 2nd Amendment Rights ~ VIDEO
