The Washington Post

Supreme Court declines to hear gun law challenges

The Supreme Court disappointed gun rights activists once again Monday, declining to review two cases involving the rights of those under 21 to own handguns.

Activists had urged the court to accept the cases, saying there has been a “massive judicial resistance” to expanding gun rights following the Supreme Court’s decision in 2008 that there is a right to gun ownership for self-defense at least within one’s home. In 2010, the court said the right applies to state and local gun-control efforts, not just those at the federal level.

But since then, the court has declined to review unsuccessful efforts to challenge restrictions, such as tight controls on who may carry a firearm in public.

At issue Monday were two such challenges. One involved a Texas law that bars almost all 18-, 19- and 20-year-olds from getting a permit to carry a handgun. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld the state law, which exempts people with military experience.

The other involved a federal law that prohibits licensed firearms dealers from selling handguns to people under 21. The dealers may sell rifles and shotguns to those 18 and over. The 1968 law banning handgun sales to adults under 21 was prompted by Congress’s finding that such laws were a logical effort to diminish violent crime.

After millions of dollars and more than 10 years of research, there are finally smart guns for the public. But there are only two viable systems available for the public to purchase. (Jason Aldag/The Washington Post)

It, too, was upheld by the appeals court, but over strenuous objections by conservative judges. Both petitions asking the Supreme Court to intervene were filed by the National Rifle Association.

The petitions expressed frustration that gun-control laws were still mostly intact years after the Supreme Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, which struck down the District’s ban on handguns.

“Given the number of laws enacted by the federal government, states, and localities in the years when a mistaken understanding of the Second Amendment held sway, one would have expected a major reconsideration of extant firearms laws to have occurred,” Washington lawyer Paul D. Clement wrote in the challenge of the federal law.

“Instead, jurisdictions have engaged in massive resistance to the clear import of those landmark decisions, and the lower federal courts, long out of the habit of taking the Second Amendment seriously, have largely facilitated the resistance.”

The cases are NRA v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and NRA v. McGraw.

The court also declined to review Lane v. Holder, in which D.C. residents challenged federal laws that restrict buying a firearm from an out-of-state dealer.

Class-action lawsuits

Also on Monday, the justices refused an industry request that they step in to stop class-action lawsuits from consumers who complain about a musty smell from front-loading washing machines.

Business groups told the court that the suits were so large that they could involve consumers who had never had a problem with the washers. The groups asked the court to accept the cases and rein in the big suits.

But the justices without comment refused the petitions from Sears, Whirlpool and German manufacturer Bosch and Siemens. That means the suits, which had been upheld by the federal appeals courts for the 6th and 7th circuits, may proceed.

The suits cover machines manufactured between 2001 and 2008. One suit involved Ohio consumers; the other covers those who purchased machines in California, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky and Texas. The Bosch suit covers consumers in California, Illinois, New York and Maryland.

The consumers charge that a design defect makes the machines likely to develop mold. It was only after they bought the washers, they say, that they learned special care was required to keep the appliances from developing mold and a musty smell.

“In those post-sale instructions, Whirlpool directed all purchasers that they must: clean the exterior, interior, door seal, and dispenser drawer; wipe the machine down after each use; leave the door open between uses; run monthly maintenance cycles; and run cycles with Affresh cleaning tablets,” the consumer brief told the court.

Whirlpool contended that it provided customers with information for any easy fix — most front-loader owners know now to leave the door open after use — and that the class of plaintiffs was far too broad.

Liability “depends on individualized issues that permeate plaintiffs’ claims and Whirlpool’s defenses,” the company said in its petition.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce was among the business organizations that had told the court it was important to review lower-court decisions allowing the suits to advance.

“If allowed to stand, the decisions will dramatically increase the class-action exposure faced by [Chamber] members who sell or manufacture products in interstate commerce, including in cases where there is no proof that any meaningful number of putative class members have suffered harm,” the organization said.

Robert Barnes has been a Washington Post reporter and editor since 1987. He has covered the Supreme Court since November 2006.

The Freddie Gray case

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Campaign 2016 Email Updates

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!
Show Comments
The New Hampshire primary is Tuesday. Get caught up on the race.
The Post's Dan Balz says ...
This was supposed to be the strongest Republican presidential field in memory, but cracks are showing. At Saturday night's debate, Marco Rubio withered in the face of unyielding attacks from Chris Christie, drawing attention to the biggest question about his candidacy: Is he ready to be president? How much the debate will affect Rubio's standing Tuesday is anybody's guess. But even if he does well, the question about his readiness to serve as president and to go up against Clinton, if she is the Democratic nominee, will linger.
Play Video
New Hampshire polling averages
Donald Trump holds a commanding lead in the next state to vote, but Marco Rubio has recently seen a jump in his support, according to polls.
New Hampshire polling averages
A victory in New Hampshire revitalized Hillary Clinton's demoralized campaign in 2008. But this time, she's trailing Bernie Sanders, from neighboring Vermont. She left the state Sunday to go to Flint, Mich., where a cost-saving decision led to poisonous levels of lead in the water of the poor, heavily black, rust-belt city. 
55% 40%
Play Video
Upcoming debates
Feb. 11: Democratic debate

on PBS, in Wisconsin

Feb 13: GOP debate

on CBS News, in South Carolina

Feb. 25: GOP debate

on CNN, in Houston, Texas

Campaign 2016
State of the race

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.