Governor Grisham, in her appeal to the Tenth Circuit, argued that the history of gun ownership in the United States supported restrictions on carrying firearms in public parks, citing numerous 19th and early 20th-century laws. This stance, however, contradicts the Supreme Court’s interpretation in the Bruen case, which highlighted the limited nature of “sensitive places” historically exempt from gun carry rights and warned against expansive “gun-free zones.”
LEGAL ALERT: The Tenth Circuit has denied the New Mexico Governor's motion to stay the preliminary injunction against her public park carry ban, which means the ban cannot be enforced while her appeal continues. pic.twitter.com/cpmwc7GPlO
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) March 18, 2024
The Tenth Circuit’s refusal to stay the injunction suggests skepticism towards the constitutional validity of the park carry ban, though a detailed opinion has yet to be released. When District Judge Kea W. Riggs initially granted the partial injunction, she noted the state’s failure to provide historical justification for such a ban. This stance was maintained upon appeal, with Judge Riggs reaffirming the lack of historical precedent for extensive firearm regulations in public parks as argued by the state.
This development signals promising news for Second Amendment supporters and represents a significant blow to Governor Grisham’s efforts to impose stricter gun control measures through public health orders. Although the legal battle continues, the rejection of the governor’s request by the appellate court marks a critical moment in the ongoing challenge to New Mexico’s proposed firearm restrictions.
Please note that this story contains affiliate links. If you click on these links and make a purchase, we may receive a commission at no extra cost to you. This support helps us continue to bring you more of the content you love. Thank you for your support!
No comments:
Post a Comment