United States v. Fabian Wright
2:22-cr-00055
N.D. Ind.Aug 22, 2024Background
- Fabian Wright was indicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) in June 2022.
- Wright previously moved to dismiss the charge, arguing § 922(g)(1) violates the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Bruen.
- Judge DeGuilio denied Wright's initial motion, holding the statute was consistent with historical firearm regulations, referencing his earlier Rice decision.
- Wright then filed a new motion to dismiss, alleging the government's use of "racially tinged" historical evidence in its prior briefing violated his due process and equal protection rights.
- The court considered whether this renewed argument was procedurally barred by the law of the case doctrine, and also addressed its substantive merit.
- Judge Simon denied Wright's second amended motion to dismiss, finding neither a procedural nor substantive violation.
Issues
| Issue | Wright's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) under Second Amendment | Statute violates Second Amendment, especially after Bruen | Statute consistent with historical tradition per Bruen | Statute satisfies Bruen; motion to dismiss denied |
| Use of "racially tinged" historical evidence | Reliance on such history violates due process/equal protection | Cited historical analogues as required by Bruen, not endorsing them | No due process/equal protection violation; no purposeful discrimination |
| Law of the Case Doctrine | Motion deserves reconsideration due to new arguments | Issues already litigated and decided in prior motion | Law of the case applies; new arguments are foreclosed |
| Timing/Procedural Validity | Current motion timely raises new constitutional issues | Arguments should've been raised in prior filings | Motion procedurally improper; no justification for delay |
Key Cases Cited
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (Supreme Court identified core of Second Amendment but recognized limits, including on felons possessing firearms)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (Second Amendment applies to states and does not disturb felon disarmament laws)
- New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (Set new historical-tradition test for Second Amendment restrictions)
- McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (Purposeful discrimination required for equal protection claim)