Worman et al v. Baker et al
Judge William G. Young: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER "For the foregoing reasons, the Court DISMISSES Count Two of the Plaintiffs complaint and GRANTS summary judgment for the Defendants on Counts One and Three. The Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on those counts is DENIED. SO ORDERED.The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to bear Arms.Both their general acceptance and their regulation, if any, are policy matters not for courts, but left to the people directly through their elected representatives. In the absence of federal legislation, Massachusetts is free to ban these weapons and large capacity magazines. Other states are equally free to leave them unregulated and available to their law-abiding citizens. These policy matters are simply not of constitutional moment. Americans are not afraid of bumptious, raucous, and robust debate about these matters. We call it democracy.Justice Scalia would be proud."(Sonnenberg, Elizabeth)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?