« Conflicting press reports on Thanksgiving | Main | PETA gets sued over taking and snuffing family's dog »
Interesting cert petition set for conference
It's Mann v. United States, set to be considered on Dec. 4. It concerns an issue of which I was unaware.
Under Federal law, a conviction is not a bar to gun possession if the conviction has been expunged, set aside, or if the defendant has had civil rights restored. Most States have fairly liberal provisions for restoring civil rights after a State conviction. But the Federal government has (almost) none -- civil rights, in the sense of rights to vote and hold office and serve on juries, are largely settled by the States, even in a Federal election. So the Feds leave those rights to the States. But the Supreme Court has held that, after a Federal conviction, a restoration of civil rights by a State does not restore Federal firearm rights. So a person convicted of a Federal offense is out of luck. Absent a change in law, neither Federal nor State courts can restore his gun rights.
But, reading the petition for cert., a number of Federal Circuits have ruled that a Federal trial court has the power to expunge the conviction. It's nowhere in statute, but they hold court have this as an inherent power. The Ninth Circuit (which is my location) ruled that a district court cannot exercise this power based on the defendant's rehabilitation, otherwise good character, etc.. Mann thus petitions the Court to resolve the split.
Hat tip to Sarah Sixgun...
4 Comments | Leave a comment
I just love how the courts can find powers that are not granted when it benefits THEM. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. There are no inherent or implied powers in any of the federal government branches. Those claims are more lies from those who wish to usurp power and control the People.
This business of imposing restrictions on felons after they've served their full sentence is obnoxiously unjust. It's only legit for voting rights because the 14th Amendment explicitly allows that. For other things, just imagine how much "fun" could be had if those convicted of felonies (or even "sufficiently serious" misdemeanors like domestic violence) could be arbitrarily stripped of the other protections of the Bill or Rights in addition to the RKBA.
At the very least, any prohibition on firearm ownership by those who've had their right to vote restored should be struck down.
Just a minor point: While the Constitution refers to the "right" to vote, voting is NOT a Right. Voting in a societal construct, a privilege. Rights ONLY come from the Creator. Anything granted by the People to each other or by the government is either privilege or an immunity. By talking of voting as a "right", we weaken the value of true God-given Rights, such as the Rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, Rights to which the RKBA belong.
All this is so much BS. There are 6 federal police powers. No more. Everything NOT delegated is/was withheld. The Courts have lied to the People and stolen power for 200+ years. IF, and that is a big IF, the feds have expansive police powers, then why did the Framers feel it necessary to include specific delegations of police powers such as that over counterfeiting and even more important over treason? Yes, the Framers recognized the the federal government couldn't even punish treason without an explicit grant. The feds can pass laws BUT the States have to handle the police power part of those laws because the feds DO NOT HAVE ANY SUCH AUTHORITY. Everyone ever punished for a federal crime that is not one of the six granted was punished unconstitutionally. There no rational, logical, objective explanations otherwise. There are irrational, subjective machinations attempting to claim police power but those machinations are all built on lies.