Decades Old Federal Law Overturned 🔫🗣

Doug Mills / The New York Times / AP / Pool

Doug Mills / The New York Times / AP / Pool

Gorsuch vs. Kavanaugh

On Monday, the Supreme Court struck down a federal law requiring longer prison sentences for the use of a gun while committing a “crime of violence.” The verdict divided the court 5-4, with Associate Justice Gorsuch writing the majority opinion and Associate Justice Kavanaugh writing the dissenting opinion – both of whom were Trump’s nominees. 

“A vague law is no law”

The court ruled that the federal law is unconstitutionally vague as it provides no consistent means to determine which offenses could be categorized as crimes of violence. Gorsuch’s majority opinion argued that the court would be overstepping their role as judges and enforcing a new law if they were to side with the government on this case. 


Daily Caller: Criminal defendants score as Gorsuch joins liberals

Washington Examiner: Supreme Court invalidates part of law aimed at preventing gun violence

The right claims that Gorsuch sided with the liberal judges to give criminal defendants a win. They argue that the Supreme Court’s decision overturns part of a law intended to prevent gun violence. Furthermore, the right contends that the decision removes a powerful tool used by federal prosecutors to prevent gun violence, in addition to bringing on a plethora of appeals from defendants convicted under the now overturned statute. 


The Hill: Gorsuch sides with liberal justices in finding gun law to be 'vague'

USA Today: Supreme Court says tough gun law is unconstitutionally vague, dividing Trump picks Gorsuch and Kavanaugh

The left highlights Gorsuch’s majority opinion. They emphasize Gorsuch’s comments regarding the law being too vague. Furthermore, the left points out that since both the defendants were carrying a short-barreled shotgun, the law triggered an automatic 35 year mandatory minimum sentence. The left also points out that the verdict not only divided the court, but also divided Trump’s two nominees – highlighting that Gorsuch showed no hesitation in siding with the liberal wing of the court.

Where's the common ground?

Both sides present the reasoning behind the majority ruling. In addition, both sides also point out that in light of the ruling, there will be a lot of appeals from those convicted under the law.

Good b-oyez!



Share this story!