By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New—Snope v. Brown and Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island rescheduled for April 25, 2025 Worth v. Jacobson: Case # 23-2248 certorari denied; Texas: Fifth Circuit: Ziegenfuss v. McCraw: Case No. 4:24-cv-01049-P: On April 16, 2025, both the plaintiffs and the defendants filed motions for summary judgment; Thoughts on the Second Amendment, politicians, and public pressure..
SCOTUS conferences through the end of the term
Snope v. Brown and Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island have been postponed again to the April 25 (this Friday) conference date.
For the rest of the 2024-2025 term, the scheduled conference dates are May 1, 14, 21, 28, and June 4, 11, 18, and 25.
Certiorari appeal denied
Minnesota: Eighth Circuit
Worth v. Jacobson: Case # 23-2248: On April 21, 2024, SCOTUS denied certiorari. Mark W. Smith, @thefourboxesdiner, analyzes this case and its impact on Second Amendment rights. Smith believes that SCOTUS’ refusal to consider the case is favorable to Second Amendment jurisprudence because it allows the favorable lower court ruling to stand and be used as precedent in subsequent legal challenges. Additionally, the plaintiffs are now entitled to receive attorney’s fees.
Background: The state of Minnesota, led by Governor Tim Walz, the losing Democratic candidate for Vice President on the Democratic ticket, was denied a petition for rehearing en banc by the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Consequently, the decision of District Court Judge Katherine Menendez was upheld. Judge Menendez stated that Minnesota law requires:
“A person must be at least 21 years of age to receive a permit to carry a handgun in Minnesota, which publicly violates the rights of individuals aged 18-20 to keep and bear arms, protected by the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.”
As a result, Minnesota requested certiorari from SCOTUS. In March, the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) supported Minnesota’s request for certiorari. FPC agreed with Minnesota that the Court should take up the state’s petition to affirm FPC’s victory and eliminate unconstitutional age-based bans across the country. FPC’s Supreme Court brief and the Eighth Circuit’s unanimous decision in favor of FPC and its co-plaintiffs can be viewed at firearmspolicy.org/worth.
Original Litigation: On July 16, 2024, a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that the Carry Ban, § 624.714 subd. 2(b)(2), violates the Second Amendment as applied to Minnesota through
The Fourteenth Amendment is unconstitutional. On March 31, 2023, Judge Katherine Menendez granted summary judgment restoring the Right to Carry to young adults. This case was initially filed on June 7, 2021.
Circuit Court
Texas: Fifth Circuit
Ziegenfuss v. McCraw: Case No. 4:24-cv-01049-P: On April 16, 2025, both the plaintiffs and the defendants filed motions for summary judgment. The plaintiffs’ motion stated that these laws are not analogous or similar to historical bans.
Background: This case was filed on October 28, 2024, against the Texas carry bans at locations where (a) alcohol accounts for 51% of the business sales, (b) racetracks, and (c) sporting events, and it requests that the enforcement of these laws be declared unconstitutional.
Thoughts on the Second Amendment, politicians, and public pressure
I was initiated into Second Amendment politics in the 1960s. I had lived in Connecticut for most of my life until 1959, when I met and married George Metaksa, an NRA life member. In April 1960, we traveled to Washington, D.C., and I attended my first NRA meeting. Little did I know that there would be many more to follow, and it would take over my life. I can assure everyone that I did not understand what I was surveying in that hotel ballroom full of guns and gun “stuff.” It was all Greek to me.
But as the decade progressed, the political reaction to the assassinations of JFK in November 1963, MLK in April 1968, and RFK in June 1968 became a political movement against the private ownership of guns. My U.S. Senator, Thomas Dodd, heavily and nationally promoted this political movement. He used his Chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency to position himself as the Senate leader on gun control. In those ten years, we had three children while I was initiated into “gun” politics. George not only encouraged me to compose multi-page letters to my Senators, especially Dodd, but we also became politically active as the Connecticut legislature promoted the idea of more restrictive statewide gun laws.
During those early years, I learned that very few politicians listened to one person unless that one person was politically connected. I also learned that most politicians not only did not care about facts, but also did not care about something they did not understand. Most did not understand anything about guns, hunting, or the Second Amendment, and were not interested in learning. A quick soundbite was all they remembered.
I give you this background because of what is going on right now in Washington, D.C. President Trump is not a gun owner. His son, Don Jr., is the gun owner in the family. Don Jr goes hunting and enjoys shooting as a sport. The President has learned some of the lingo and, I believe, understands the value of being on “our” side of the issue. But all gun owners must face the reality that most politicians are always aware of which way the political winds blow. We already saw in Trump’s first term that he was in favor of banning bump stocks after the Las Vegas massacre..
I have spent far too many meetings with Representatives, Senators, and other members of the political class to know that if they do not hire staff who truly understand the “gun issue,” they are likely to say something they will regret and upset their pro-Second Amendment supporters. A case in point is happening now.
The Trump DOJ is aiming to be proactive on Second Amendment rights. However, many United States Attorneys nationwide have either not received notice of the change in perspective or are holdovers with a Biden Administration anti-gun attitude. Gun Owners of America posted on X.com about the April 9 letter Acting United States Attorney Matthew Podolsky wrote supporting the NY state position in New York v. Arm or Ally, No. 24-773(L). Thanks to the uproar caused by gun owners, Podolsky reversed himself on April 21.
However, on that same day, Ammoland published an article titled “Who’s Minding the Store?” written by Second Amendment journalist Dan Codrea. The article raises the question of who is setting policy, and was written before Podolsky’s supplemental letter became public. The public uproar on social networks, obviously in this case, got the correct reaction. It shows us that social networks provide a good sounding board for Second Amendment activists. Keep it up!
