No announcement yet.

Supremes order U.S. city to explain its confiscation of legal guns

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Supremes order U.S. city to explain its confiscation of legal guns

    'This is a significant development'

    By WND Staff
    Published April 26, 2020 at 4:11pmShare on FacebookTweetEmailPrint

    The U.S. Supreme Court has ordered officials in San Jose, California, to explain why they confiscated the legally owned guns of Lori Rodriguez.

    They still have them.

    The case was brought by the Second Amendment Foundation on behalf of the woman.

    The Supreme Court justices have instructed city officials to respond by May 20.

    TRENDING: Biden accidentally airs 'racist' ad that infuriates voters he desperately needs

    "We’re encouraged by this development in the case," said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "If the city thought they could just ignore this case and make it go away, they’re wrong."

    SAF has been joined in the case by the California Gun Rights Foundation.

    "Her firearms were seized seven years ago after her husband was taken to a hospital on a mental health issue," the foundation said. "At the time, a San Jose police officer advised Rodriguez he had authority to seize all firearms in the residence, including those belonging solely to her, which were all locked in a California-approved safe. The guns were taken without a warrant, and over Rodriguez's objection."

    Gottlieb said the inquiry is "a significant development, because it signals the Supreme Court is interested in the case."

    Should the government have the power to confiscate legal guns?

    In 2013, police seized all the weapons from Rodriguez' home then refused to return them.

    In the lower courts, judges quickly concluded Rodriguez had done nothing wrong and was allowed to buy new weapons. But city law-enforcement officers still kept her old ones.

    "Lori Rodriguez is not a criminal, nor is she prohibited by law from owning firearms. Yet she's essentially been robbed by the city of San Jose and its police department, with the cooperation of lower courts, including the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals," Gottlieb said.

    "When a municipal government agency can seize property without a warrant, and be protected by the lower courts in so doing, it is time for the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and right this dangerously tilted ship before it capsizes."

    Don Kilmer, a civil rights lawyer working on the case, said Rodriguez "has at all times complied with California’s many gun control laws, including those requiring locked storage."

    "But the city of San Jose outrageously continues to refuse to return the constitutionally protected property they unlawfully took from her."

    He said governments "have no reason and no right to take guns from law-abiding people who are legally eligible to keep and bear arms, full stop."

    "The Constitution does not have a 'gun' exception to fundamental Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights, but that is exactly what the Ninth Circuit's dangerous decision means. We hope the Supreme Court will vindicate our clients' rights and restore the rule of law in the Ninth Circuit."

    Article can be found here:
    Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. James Madison, Federalist Paper No 10