PA Bill Number: HB829
Title: In preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Description: An Act amending the act of April 12, 1951 (P.L.90, No.21), known as the Liquor Code, in preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions;
Last Action: Signed in House
Last Action Date: Jul 3, 2024
Schmidt [Kansas AG] says Second Amendment broad enough to protect firearms accessories :: 02/22/2019
The right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment extends beyond a firearm itself and includes some types of firearms accessories, Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt today told the U.S. Supreme Court.
Schmidt led a group of eight state attorneys general today in filing a legal brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal and reverse a recent ruling by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that firearms accessories fall outside the scope of the Second Amendment.
"[T]he lawful use of firearms – including for hunting or recreational shooting – is a venerable tradition,” the attorneys general wrote. “This is especially true in Kansas, where its citizens recently and overwhelmingly voted to amend the State’s Constitution to reaffirm that an individual ‘has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose’ and the right to ‘hunt … by the use of traditional methods.’ The Tenth Circuit’s unsupported conclusion that firearm accessories are categorically excluded from Second Amendment protection threatens … citizens’ right to enjoy these time-honored pursuits.”
The brief notes that prior Supreme Court rulings have held that the “arms” the people have the constitutional right to keep and bear include firearms accessories that are “typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.” The attorneys general noted that the 10th Circuit’s decision is so sweeping that, under its logic, “Congress could ban all ammunition without violating the Second Amendment. That cannot be correct.”
Kansas was joined in its brief by Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, South Carolina, Texas and Utah. The attorneys general asked the Supreme Court to review the lower court’s decision in a federal case that arose from Kansas involving an individual who possessed a sound suppressor. The Supreme Court is expected to decide later this spring whether to hear the appeal.
The case is Kettler v. United States, No. 18-936. A copy of the states’ brief is available at http://bit.ly/2GRrhBK.
