No Result
View All Result
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
Smart Investment Today
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
No Result
View All Result
Smart Investment Today
No Result
View All Result
Home Editor's Pick

State v. Ducker Brief: Defending the Second Amendment Rights of North Carolinians

by
March 30, 2026
in Editor's Pick
0
State v. Ducker Brief: Defending the Second Amendment Rights of North Carolinians
0
SHARES
2
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Matthew Cavedon

North Carolinians value their constitutional right to keep and bear arms. More than 40 percent of adult North Carolinians own guns. The right to keep and bear arms and to hunt are enshrined in the state constitution. North Carolina statutes that categorically disarm people convicted of felonies—no matter how minor, non-violent, or old the conviction—impose severe constraints and unequal burdens on far too many North Carolinians.

Just under four years ago, the US Supreme Court transformed how courts review the constitutionality of government restrictions on firearms. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass​ociation v. Bruen, the Court held that a government seeking to restrict an individual’s right to bear firearms bears the burden to show that the restriction is consistent with the Second Amendment’s text and history. Two years later, in United States v. Rahimi, the Court affirmed the power of government to bar dangerous persons from accessing firearms, but it also made it clear that determination of dangerousness—and the permissible scope of such restrictions—is not subject to generalizations and must be grounded in the facts of each case. These precedents require trial courts to evaluate, on a case-by-case basis, whether and to what extent individuals who, like appellee Eric Ducker, have a criminal history can be barred from firearm possession.

Cato joined an amicus brief filed by the ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation, arguing that the North Carolina Court of Appeals erred when it determined that the Second Amendment allows the state to bar all North Carolinians previously convicted of any felony from purchasing, owning, possessing, or having “in their custody, care, or control any firearm,” without regard to whether the felony was violent in nature, the individual’s overall history of violence, and the time elapsed since conviction. 

The brief urges the North Carolina Supreme Court to remand Mr. Ducker’s case for the trial court to determine whether his conviction as a felon in possession of a firearm violates his rights under the Second Amendment and the state constitution.

Previous Post

Ford’s FCE Bank sets aside £155m ahead of car finance compensation ruling

Next Post

Ineos losses widen to $593m as Ratcliffe halts dividend amid energy turmoil

Next Post
Ineos losses widen to $593m as Ratcliffe halts dividend amid energy turmoil

Ineos losses widen to $593m as Ratcliffe halts dividend amid energy turmoil

    Sign up for our newsletter to receive the latest insights, updates, and exclusive content straight to your inbox! Whether it's industry news, expert advice, or inspiring stories, we bring you valuable information that you won't find anywhere else. Stay connected with us!


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    • Trending
    • Comments
    • Latest
    Pibit.AI raises $7m Series A to bring trusted AI underwriting to the insurance sector

    Pibit.AI raises $7m Series A to bring trusted AI underwriting to the insurance sector

    November 20, 2025

    Gold Prices Rise as the Dollar Slowly Dies

    May 25, 2024

    Richard Murphy, The Bank of England, And MMT Confusion

    March 15, 2025

    We Can’t Fix International Organizations like the WTO. Abolish Them.

    March 15, 2025

    The Warsh Era Begins

    0

    Ana-Maria Coaching Marks Milestone with New Book Release

    0

    New Bonded Warehouse Facilities Launched in Immingham

    0

    From Corporate Burnout to High-Performance Coach: Anna Mosley’s Inspiring Journey with ‘Eighty’

    0
    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    June 18, 2026
    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    June 18, 2026
    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    June 18, 2026

    The Misesian, vol. 3, no. 3, 2026

    June 18, 2026

    Recent News

    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    June 18, 2026
    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    June 18, 2026
    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    The Impossibility of Reversal: Why Capital Punishment Fails the Test of Accountability

    June 18, 2026

    The Misesian, vol. 3, no. 3, 2026

    June 18, 2026
    • About us
    • Contact us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Copyright © 2026 smartinvestmenttoday.com | All Rights Reserved

    No Result
    View All Result
    • News
    • Economy
    • Editor’s Pick
    • Investing
    • Stock

    Copyright © 2026 smartinvestmenttoday.com | All Rights Reserved