Massachusetts high court strikes down switchblade ban
Adds detail on ruling, comment from state attorney general in paragraphs 14-16
By Nate Raymond
BOSTON, Aug 27 (Reuters) -Massachusetts' highest court on Tuesday struck down a state ban on carrying switchblades, saying a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling requiring modern gun restrictions to be consistent with the nation's history and tradition covered other weapons too.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that a 1957 law barring people from possessing spring-release pocketknives commonly known as "switchblades" violated the right to keep and bear arms enshrined in the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.
The court reached that conclusion while dismissing a charge filed against David Canjura for unlawfully possessing a switchblade, which Boston police found when responding to a report of an altercation between Canjura and his girlfriend.
The justices' decision was based on a 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that established a new test for assessing whether modern firearm restrictions comply with the Second Amendment by requiring them to be "consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."
The ruling, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, was issued by the Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority and has led to a series of court rulings invalidating modern gun regulations.
The office of Suffolk County District Attorney Kevin Hayden, a Democrat, had argued that even after that decision, the Second Amendment's protections only extended to firearms and that knives could not be legally considered "arms."
Seven other states plus the District of Columbia categorically ban switchblades or other automatic knives, while two others impose blade length restrictions of less than two inches.
But Justice Serge Georges, writing for the 5-0 court, said the state was incorrect and that knives, like handguns, fit within the definition of arms as both are weapons that can be used by someone for offensive or defensive purposes during a confrontation.
"The Second Amendment extends to all bearable arms and is not limited to firearms," he wrote.
Georges cited the U.S. Supreme Court's 2016 decision to throw out a ruling by his court upholding a ban on stun guns. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court later in 2018 said the ban violated the Second Amendment.
Georges said the state had failed to identify any laws regulating weapons akin to folding pocketknives in place at the time of the 2nd Amendment'sratification in 1791 or the ratification in 1868 of the 14th Amendment, which extended the Constitution's Bill of Rights to the states.
He said a review of history showed that since the colonial and Revolutionary War era, Americans had used knives for self-defense and that the folding pocketknife "played an important role, both as a tool and a weapon."
"Accordingly, the Commonwealth has not met its burden of demonstrating a historical tradition justifying the regulation of switchblade knives," Georges wrote.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, a Democrat who had filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the switchblade ban, in a statement called the ruling disappointing.
"This case demonstrates the difficult position that the Supreme Court has put our state courts in with the Bruen decision," she said.
Spokespeople for Hayden and Canjura's attorney had no comment.
The case is Commonwealth v. Canjura, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, No. SJC-13432.
For the state: Elisabeth Martino of the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office
For Canjura: Kaitlyn Gerber of the Committee for Public Counsel Services
Read more:
US Supreme Court upholds federal domestic-violence gun ban
U.S. Supreme Court expands gun rights, strikes down New York law
Reporting by Nate Raymond
Dernières actualités
Avertissement : Les entités de XM Group proposent à notre plateforme de trading en ligne un service d'exécution uniquement, autorisant une personne à consulter et/ou à utiliser le contenu disponible sur ou via le site internet, qui n'a pas pour but de modifier ou d'élargir cette situation. De tels accès et utilisation sont toujours soumis aux : (i) Conditions générales ; (ii) Avertissements sur les risques et (iii) Avertissement complet. Un tel contenu n'est par conséquent fourni que pour information générale. En particulier, sachez que les contenus de notre plateforme de trading en ligne ne sont ni une sollicitation ni une offre de participation à toute transaction sur les marchés financiers. Le trading sur les marchés financiers implique un niveau significatif de risques pour votre capital.
Tout le matériel publié dans notre Centre de trading en ligne est destiné à des fins de formation / d'information uniquement et ne contient pas – et ne doit pas être considéré comme contenant – des conseils et recommandations en matière de finance, de fiscalité des investissements ou de trading, ou un enregistrement de nos prix de trading ou une offre, une sollicitation, une transaction à propos de tout instrument financier ou bien des promotions financières non sollicitées à votre égard.
Tout contenu tiers, de même que le contenu préparé par XM, tels que les opinions, actualités, études, analyses, prix, autres informations ou liens vers des sites tiers contenus sur ce site internet sont fournis "tels quels", comme commentaires généraux sur le marché et ne constituent pas des conseils en investissement. Dans la mesure où tout contenu est considéré comme de la recherche en investissement, vous devez noter et accepter que le contenu n'a pas été conçu ni préparé conformément aux exigences légales visant à promouvoir l'indépendance de la recherche en investissement et, en tant que tel, il serait considéré comme une communication marketing selon les lois et réglementations applicables. Veuillez vous assurer que vous avez lu et compris notre Avis sur la recherche en investissement non indépendante et notre avertissement sur les risques concernant les informations susdites, qui peuvent consultés ici.
