Could Hunter Biden be the next poster child for Second Amendment rights?
The president’s son is under investigation for potentially breaking the law banning drug users from owning guns – but the law’s constitutionality faces growing challenges.

Hunter Biden could soon find himself in a surprising position: at the cutting edge of the fight to strengthen the Second Amendment.

The president’s son is the target of a Justice Department investigation scrutinizing his purchase of a gun in 2018 — a time when he has said he was regularly using crack cocaine. Federal law bans drug users from owning guns.

Since Bruen, most courts have still upheld the law banning drug users from owning guns, according to Jeff Welty, a professor at the School of Government at the University of North Carolina who closely tracks gun cases. But several have ruled against it.

Just a week after Bruen was released, a federal district judge in Utah ruled that the prohibition on drug users owning guns was unconstitutional because of its vagueness. Judge Jill Parrish noted that the statute itself doesn’t define the word “user” and also doesn’t say how the timing of people’s drug use affects their right to own guns. Parrish’s ruling — which the government has appealed — was based on the Fifth Amendment, not the Second, so it did not cite the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision. But Bruen only strengthens challenges to the drug-user prohibition.

You can see where this is going.

The Biden Administration is going to go to bat to defend Hunter.

They are going to use Bruen to argue that he may have been addicted to crack, but banning a crack addict from buying a gun is unconstitutional.

Yeah, Trump banning bump stocks and Biden legalizing buying guns as a crack head wasn’t on my bingo card.

Now I want someone to give Hunter a suppressed, full auto, SBR so the Biden Administration can get SCOTUS to declare the NFA unconstitutional.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

4 thoughts on “Biden expanding gun rights was not on my bingo card”
  1. They’ll ‘investigate’ and then either it will be forgotten about or a determination of ‘no wrongdoing’. There will never be an indictment or any sort of court activity.

  2. I am sure that if the law is in fact changed, it will include wording that makes it applicable only to party members and their families.

Comments are closed.