US Supreme Court rebuffs challenge to ban on gun ownership by nonviolent felons

WASHINGTON, March 2 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court turned away on Monday a challenge to the legality of a federal law that bars people with serious criminal convictions including nonviolent felons from owning firearms, bypassing a chance to further expand gun rights.

The justices declined to hear an appeal by a Utah woman named Melynda Vincent of a lower court’s ruling that found the gun restriction did not violate her right under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment to “keep and bear arms.”

The prohibition on gun possession by nonviolent felons was part of a U.S. law called the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Vincent, a single mother who resides in Utah, was barred from owning a firearm following her 2008 felony bank fraud conviction for cashing a fraudulent check in the amount of roughly $500, according to court papers. Vincent appealed to the Supreme Court after lower courts refused to reinstate her ability to lawfully own a gun.

President Donald Trump’s administration had urged the court to turn away the challenge to the provision. In court papers, Justice Department lawyers noted that the administration already has taken steps to give U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi the authority to restore gun rights to nonviolent felons who meet certain eligibility criteria.

The justices have recently turned away numerous cases like Vincent’s.

In a nation deeply divided over how to address persistent firearms violence including frequent mass shootings, the Supreme Court often has taken an expansive view of Second Amendment protections. The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, widened gun rights in three major rulings in 2008, 2010 and most recently in 2022.

The Supreme Court’s landmark 2022 precedent in a case called New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen was powered by the court’s six conservatives over dissents from three liberal justices. 

Challengers to the restriction on gun ownership by nonviolent felons have cited the Bruen decision’s holding that the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense. 

The Bruen decision invalidated New York state’s limits on carrying concealed handguns outside the home. In doing so, it created a new test for assessing firearms laws, saying that restrictions must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” not simply advance an important government interest.

The court in 2024 ruled 8-1 that a federal law that makes it a crime for people under domestic violence restraining orders to have guns satisfied the court’s stringent Bruen test.

The court is considering two important Second Amendment cases during its current term.

During arguments in January, the court’s conservative justices signaled skepticism toward a Hawaii law that restricts the handguns on private property open to the public, like most businesses, without the owner’s permission. The court on Monday heard arguments in a bid by Trump’s administration to defend a federal law barring users of illegal drugs from owning guns.

(Reporting by John Kruzel; Editing by Will Dunham)