Massachusetts Gun Ban Case Highlights Importance of Trump’s Judicial Appointments

Can a state attorney general unilaterally reinterpret a gun control statute to retroactively ban firearms that had been openly bought and sold within the state throughout the law’s 20 year history? William G. Young, a federal judge in Massachusetts, said yes in Workman v. Healy , the NRA supported challenge to the Massachusetts AG’s ban. That opinion illustrates why President Donald Trump’s appointments to the federal judiciary are so important. A wave of distinguished judicial nominees from President Trump’s is already descending upon the federal bench. But far more are needed, and the U.S. Senate needs to quickly confirm them. It is no exaggeration to say that pro-Second Amendment judges are often the last line of defense for our Second Amendment rights. This progress must continue. Because the alternative is what we are seeing in case after case from jurists whose views of the Second Amendment are rooted in the mid to late 20 th Century, before the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller . Few judges at that time took the Second Amendment seriously. Yet their boldness in trying to write the Second Amendment’s individual right out of existence is perhaps exceeded by the boldness of judges like Young, who – though bound by Heller – defiantly refuse to enforce it. Not only does Young’s opinion in the Workman case uphold an expansive ban on semiautomatic firearms and magazines by misreading Heller , it goes out of its way to mock the legacy […]

Click here to view original web page at Massachusetts Gun Ban Case Highlights Importance of Trump’s Judicial Appointments