WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Conservative U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch sided with the court’s four liberals on Monday in striking down a federal law that imposes stiff criminal sentences for those convicted of certain crimes involving firearms.
In the 5-4 ruling, with Gorsuch’s fellow conservatives in dissent, the court ruled that the federal law in question was written too vaguely and therefore violated the U.S. Constitution. Gorsuch was appointed to the court by President Donald Trump in 2017.
The decision marked a victory for defendants Maurice Davis and Andre Glover, who were convicted of multiple robbery counts, one count of conspiracy to commit robbery and two counts each of brandishing a shotgun during a crime of violence for their roles in a series of 2014 gas station robberies in Texas.
In Monday’s ruling, the court invalidated their firearms convictions, meaning they will likely face lower prison sentences. The decision does not affect their other convictions.
(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham)
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme-court-strikes-down-151424589.html
“In Monday’s ruling, the court invalidated their firearms convictions, meaning they will likely face lower prison sentences.”
‘Firearms convictions’.
If the weapon was used in the commission of a crime, that’s one thing.
But if they’re talking about mere POSSESSION of any firearms NOT used in the commission of a crime, then it is absolutely UNLAWFUL to charge them with any type of a crime.
Commies will be commies.
Meaning TARGETS… for patriots.
This is something I should have asked yesterday on this article…
… WTH is a stiff firearm?
Are they practical, and is it in my best interests to acquire one?
🙄