121 F.4th 656
8th Cir.2024Background
- Edell Jackson challenged the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), which prohibits felons from possessing firearms.
- Following Jackson's conviction, the Eighth Circuit denied his petition for rehearing en banc.
- Several judges dissented, contending that the panel decision (Jackson II) misinterpreted recent Supreme Court Second Amendment decisions.
- Recent Supreme Court decisions (including Rahimi and Bruen) established a historical tradition test for Second Amendment cases and addressed the distinction between facial and as-applied challenges.
- Jackson II held that § 922(g)(1) is facially constitutional and does not allow as-applied challenges by individual felons.
- Dissenters argued this approach conflicts with Supreme Court precedent and shields the statute from necessary constitutional scrutiny.
Issues
| Issue | Jackson's Argument | United States' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether as-applied Second Amendment | As-applied challenges should be allowed based on individual | § 922(g)(1) is facially constitutional and needs no | As-applied challenges not |
| challenges to § 922(g)(1) are permitted | dangerousness or threat. | case-by-case review. | allowed under circuit precedent |
| Whether lifelong firearm bans on all | Such bans lack historical support; only dangerous felons | Congress can categorically bar all felons, regardless of | § 922(g)(1) upheld as facially |
| felons are consistent with Bruen/Rahimi | might be constitutionally barred. | the underlying offense. | constitutional |
| Applicability of Supreme Court precedent | Rahimi and Bruen support individualized assessments and | Supreme Court leaves existing felon bans untouched and | Court interprets precedent to |
| to felon-in-possession laws | reject categorical disarmament. | emphasizes presumption of lawfulness. | mean categorical bans allowed |
| Who bears the burden to justify banning | Burden is on government to prove historical consistency. | Agrees government bears the burden post-Bruen. | Government now bears burden, |
| felons from firearm possession | but as-applied claims rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Rahimi, 144 S. Ct. 1889 (2024) (Supreme Court clarified approach for analyzing Second Amendment challenges and left open as-applied questions for disarmament statutes)
- N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022) (established text-and-history test for Second Amendment claims)
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms, with dicta on felon dispossession laws)