Why Did the Supreme Court Turn Its Back On AR-15 Owners? Justice Thomas Speaks Out!

The Supreme Court has once again declined to review the Illinois law banning semi-automatic rifles and Standard-capacity magazines.

Now, why did the Supreme Court refuse to hear this case?

Justice Thomas expressed his disappointment in the denial, emphasizing the importance of the issues at hand.

In his statement, Justice Thomas said, 'The AR-15 is the most popular semi-automatic rifle in America and is therefore undeniably in common use today.

He criticized the Seventh Circuit's decision, stating that it 'illustrates why this Court must provide more guidance on which weapons the Second Amendment covers.

He pointed out the Court's past recognition that the Second Amendment extends to 'all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

However, he noted that there's still a lack of a comprehensive framework for evaluating restrictions on types of weapons.

Thomas didn't hold back, calling out the Seventh Circuit's logic. He said, 'The AR-15 is a civilian, not military, weapon. No army in the world uses a service rifle that is only semiautomatic.' He also highlighted that Illinois' ban is 'highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.'

So, what does this mean for our Second Amendment rights? Well, by refusing to hear this case, the Supreme Court has basically left the Seventh Circuit's decision in place, at least for now.

This means Illinois can continue enforcing its ban on 'semi-auto rifles,' which concerns me because it sets a precedent that could gas up other states to enact their own Assault weapon bans because they'll see it as open season on Semi-Auto Rifles and Standard Capacity Magazines.

Whatever you do, don’t ever let anyone tell you the Second Amendment doesn’t protect your right to own an AR15.

If there is one gun on this planet that the Second Amendment protects, it is absolutely the AR-15.

Not because the AR-15 was specifically what the framers had in mind when the Second Amendment was drafted, but because the framers were thinking about how to protect the people's right to own the most effective tool to preserve this free state and protect themselves.

At that time, that tool was the musket, and today, that musket is the AR-15.

So Yes, AR-15s are Protected by the Second Amendment.

"A Regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

It didn't say only handguns; it said ARMS.

Back in stock is our design with the Second Amendment in the shape of a RIFLE. Get your AR15 are protected by the Second Amendment Shirts, Hats, Drinkware, & Stickers:

Let me know your thoughts on this recent Supreme Court decision in the comments.

New 40oz 2A Tumblers, 2A Designs, Vacuum Insulated, With Handle & Straw

➡️ Join Our 2A Membership Club here on YOUTUBE and get these perks:

➡️ Join MY Exclusive 2A Advocacy Text List while AUTOMATICALLY being entered in our monthly 2A Giveaways

➡️ Get UnApologetically 2A Content In Short-Form On YouTube & Help Protect The Second Amendment

➡️ FREE BOOK - If I Only Had One Concealed Carry

Looking to help further our Pro Constitution, Pro 2A message, donate below:

UnApologetically 2A Content Content On Other Platforms:

#2ANews #ColionNoir #ThePewPewLife #PewPewLife #SecondAmendment

[dennissmyth]

Man they just need to make all of America Constitutional carry. I'm so tired of both party's being unconstitutional.

[m.r.jarrell]

Those laws are unconstitutional on their face and any lawyer who says otherwise should be disbarred.

[DoubleplusUngoodthinkful]

"shall not be infringed" covers ALL weapons.

[reaper]

Never give your guns up or register them.

[Reb]

Illinois is just going to keep continuing to lose population and they will still wonder why that is happening…

[dimtucas]

People died to give us this freedom. Can't let it be in vain.

[louispawloski]

Since this law violates the Bill of Rights and the Supreme Court decision said they were legal, all those attempting to uphold this law should be arrested.

[MrMysteriousDm]

When the goverment says you cannot Exercise your freedoms. Then it's time for a new government.

[sailboatbob]

Keep a close watch on crime in NOT going to go down.

[TheHarleywolf]

These bans violate numerous SCOTUS rulings and the court does not have the balls to say as much.

[marcmalonzo]

“A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void.”
- Chief Justice John Marshall

[TheAir]

The 2A should protect the M-16 not just the AR-15

[theoutlawking]

He said these laws are constitutional, apparently they don't know what Constitutional means: SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!

[AllAboutSurvival]

the Second Amendment is about protecting our right to bear arms, and that includes AR-15s.

[richardjames]

Justice Thomas is a legendary scholar and defender of the Constitution.
So thankful for him.

[PhotriusPyrelus]

What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard for 9 of the most educated people on the planet to understand...

[marcmalonzo]

We don't need Permission to exercise our Rights, otherwise it's a privilege.

[freakdawg]

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. this law is unconstitutional do not comply

[thanehanson]

Law bidding citizens should have more rights than criminals. So why aren't they enforcing the laws on criminals.

[InCompetnt]

if 30-round mags are illegal, we should buy them anyway