U.S. top court rejects challenge to San Francisco gun regulation

Published 06/08/2015, 10:06 AM
© Reuters. A general view of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington

By Lawrence Hurley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a challenge by gun rights activists to a San Francisco regulation that requires gun owners to keep their weapons locked up or disabled when stored at home.

By declining to hear an appeal filed by gun owners and the National Rifle Association, the court left intact a March 2014 ruling by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the measure.

The regulation, issued in 2007, states that anyone who keeps a handgun at home must either store it in a locked container or disable it with a trigger lock.

The challengers said the regulation violates the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment, which guarantees the right to bear arms.

Two of the nine-justice court's conservative justices, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, said they would have taken the case.

Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court has outlined to lower courts how to approach Second Amendment cases but the courts that oversaw the San Francisco case "have failed to protect it."

In 2012, the gun owners unsuccessfully sought an injunction that would have prevented the regulation from being enforced.

The appeals court also had upheld a regulation banning hollow-point ammunition that is designed to expand or fragment on impact, but that was not at issue in this appeal.

The Supreme Court has not taken up a major gun case since 2010. In the 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller case, the court held that the Second Amendment guaranteed an individual right to bear arms. Two years later in the case McDonald v. City of Chicago, the court held that the earlier ruling applied to the states.

As part of the 2008 ruling, the court struck down the District of Columbia's trigger-lock requirement.

© Reuters. A general view of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington

The case on which the court acted on Monday is Jackson v. San Francisco, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 14-704.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2025 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.