A federal judge in Kansas recently ruled that a ban on the possession of a machine gun was unconstitutional. The judge dismissed charges against an American gun owner who had been charged with two counts of illegally owning a machine gun.
According to The Daily Caller, Judge John Broomes, who was appointed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas by former President Donald Trump, ruled against the machine gun ban on Friday, dismissing the illegal machine gun ownership charges against Tamori Morgan.
“The court finds that the Second Amendment applies to the weapons charged because they are ‘bearable arms’ within the original meaning of the amendment,” Broomes wrote. “The court further finds that the government has failed to establish that this nation’s history of gun regulation justifies the application of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) to Defendant. The court therefore grants the motion to dismiss.”
The Daily Caller reported that prosecutors had charged Morgan with violating 18 United States Code § 922(o), which states, “it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machine gun.”
Based on court documents, Morgan had been charged for possessing an Anderson Manufacturing, model AM-15 .300 caliber machine gun. Morgan had also been charged for possessing a “Glock switch,” which is a device that transforms the Glock into an automatic weapon.
In his ruling, Broomes claimed it was the government’s responsibility to prove a historical basis for banning Americans from owning machine guns. The Supreme Court previously ruled in “New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen” that restrictions on machine guns could be considered constitutional if the regulations reflected historical precedent.
READ MORE: Video: VP Harris supported sending cops to seize guns from ‘lists’ of gun owners
According to Reuters, Congress placed restrictions on the ownership of machine guns by passing the National Firearms Act of 1934 prior to instituting a ban on machine gun ownership in 1986. As a result, the prosecutors in Morgan’s case claimed that the Second Amendment did not pertain to his ownership of a machine gun.
Broomes disagreed with the prosecutors, stating that machine guns are protected “within the original meaning of the amendment.”
“Plaintiff is charged with two counts of machinegun possession, and both counts apply to arms that can be carried in the hand,” Broomes added. “Thus, by definition, the machinegun and Glock switch are bearable arms within the plain text of the Second Amendment.”
The Daily Caller reported that the Department of Justice can appeal Friday’s ruling. Meanwhile, the National Association of Gun Rights celebrated Friday’s ruling, tweeting, “This is incredible.”
