The Supreme Court has indicated that violent criminals can be stripped of the right to own a gun. But what about non-violent criminals?
The federal appeals court in Philadelphia says they can be stripped of the right to bear arms, too. It so ruled in its decision today in Range v. Attorney General, an opinion jointly authored by three judges, two of them Democrats and one of them a Republican (Democratic-appointed Judges Patty Schwartz and Cheryl Ann Krause, and Republican-appointed Judge Jane Roth). It is the first federal appeals court decision to decide the issue since the Supreme Court issued its decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which overturned some of the cramped readings of the Second Amendment adopted by the lower courts.
The decision in Range v. Attorney General contains a long discussion of the historical roots and scope of such restrictions on felons. Here is the punch line:
Based on history and tradition, we conclude that “the people” constitutionally entitled to bear arms are the “law-abiding, responsible citizens” of the polity, a category that properly excludes those who have demonstrated disregard for the rule of law through the commission of felony and felony-equivalent offenses, whether or not those crimes are violent. Additionally, we conclude that even if Range [who had been convicted of a state felony-equivalent charge of welfare fraud] falls within “the people,” the Government has met its burden to demonstrate that its prohibition is consistent with historical tradition.
After concluding that even non-violent felons can be denied the right to possess a gun, the court ruled that Bryan Range was not entitled to an injunction striking down the federal ban on him possessing a firearm. Range had pleaded guilty in 1995 to the charge of welfare fraud in violation of Pennsylvania state law. In 1995, Range pleaded guilty to making false statements about his income to obtain $2,458 of food stamp assistance. Range was sentenced to three years’ probation, $2,458 in restitution, and a $100 fine. Federal law forbids “any person . . . who has been convicted in any court, of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year”—to “possess … any firearm or ammunition,” in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
In 2020, Range filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, seeking a declaratory judgment that the federal law violates the Second Amendment as applied to him, as well as
an injunction to bar its enforcement against him. The appeals court ruled against Range, finding that the federal law was constitutional in its entirety.
