Supreme Court’s narrow gun decision kindles divisions, more questions

The Supreme Court’s gun decision on Thursday was technically unanimous. But it was narrow. 

The ruling found the government cannot criminally prosecute a man for firearm possession simply because he admitted to smoking marijuana a few times a week.

Beneath the surface, the justices split. 

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito and liberal Justice Elena Kagan formed an odd couple, jointly insisting the court’s opinion went too far. 

The two other liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, appeared ready to blow up conservatives’ entire approach to gun rights. 

And Justice Clarence Thomas said he wants to go further and invalidate federal gun control laws for reasons unrelated to the Second Amendment. The divisions reveal some of the broader questions that remain unresolved about the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Judges have been grappling with the test the conservative majority laid out four years ago, which requires that gun control measures have a historical analogue to survive.

Still, the unanimous bottom line left Second Amendment advocates pleased.

John Commerford, the executive director of the National Rifle Association’s lobbying and legal arm, called the decision a “major victory.” 

“No one should be deprived of their God-given right to keep and bear arms for engaging in nonviolent conduct, and there is no historical justification for doing so,” he said in a statement.

The decision leaves many questions unanswered, however. 

“In many respects, this case is a narrow one,” Justice Neil Gorsuch cautioned in the majority opinion. 

The decision doesn’t entirely strike down the criminal charge at issue. It leaves the door open for prosecutions if........

© The Hill