Supreme Court rules warrantless home gun confiscation is unconstitutional

[GaryS]

The was a First Circuit Court of Appeals case,

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that warrantless gun confiscation from Americans' homes is unconstitutional, voting unanimously on the side of a Rhode Island man whose firearms were taken by law enforcement without a warrant after his wife expressed concerns that he might hurt himself.

According to Caniglia v Strom, a lower court had previously determined that police confiscating the guns without a warrant fell under the Fourth Amendment's "community caretaking" exception, but a 9-0 vote from the nation's top court struck down that ruling.

 

[Llance]

It's about time SCOTUS got a backbone.

Llance

 

[ladder13]

9 zip, great news.

 

[SMSgt]

I didn't think they would all agree on the sun rising in the east.

 

[GaryS]

Note that technically this was a 4th Amendment case not a 2A case. The decision doesn't cover "Red Flag" cases, but the Court might take one of those as well.

For MA residents this might require police to obtain a warrant when a LTC is revoked before they can seize firearms.

 

[bulletslap]

It is pleasantly surprising when the judges on the Highest Court can actually read and comprehend relatively simple English.

 

[Rodan]

Dissapointing that they sidestepped "red flag" seizures, because for the most part, the threshold for confiscation/surrender under those laws come nowhere near the standards required for warrants.

 

[beaverislander]

This should have been a no brainer, however I'm thankful they pulled their heads out and ruled it unconstitutional. You just never know these days.

 

[Doug44]

Nine to zero that is unheard of.

 

[stansdds]

Although the SCOTUS did not address directly confiscation based on "red flag" laws, they did reach the correct decision and without dissent. That is unusual. Wonder if the specter of an expanded court has them working together rather than reaching split decisions?

 

[dockmurgw]

Wonder if the specter of an expanded court has them working together rather than reaching split decisions?

If anything, this decision will have the opposite affect. The people pushing for an expanded court will not like this decision.

 

[SchemaEnigma]

If anything, this decision will have the opposite affect. The people pushing for an expanded court will not like this decision.

Yes, but to overturn it by packing the court is a much more daunting task. A 19 judge court?

 

[GaryS]

Manchin has already said packing the court is a non starter.

 

[Bucher33]

Manchin has already said packing the court is a non starter.

Yeah, Senator Manchin also voted for the amendment to keep the XL Keystone pipeline open and then in the middle of the night changed his vote. Also said he would not have voted for Obamacare but on tape praising it. And recently was in favor of federal constitutional carry but opposed his own state when they voted on same thing. Just saying at this point I do not believe anything he says. And for that matter I do not believe most things said by most politicians PERIOD.