Second Amendment Wins Support For Knife Rights’ Federal Cases

Recent Second Amendment decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals have resulted in the filing of Notices of Supplemental Authority under Rule 28(j) in all three of Knife Rights’ federal lawsuits challenging knife bans as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. These are our challenges to California’s 2-inch and over ban on switchblades, Minnesota’s total ban on switchblades and the Federal Switchblade Act. Critically, the courts reaffirmed and clarified controlling Second Amendment precedents that apply in our cases. Rule 28(j) makes provision for calling the court’s attention to authorities that come to the party’s attention after the brief has been filed.
In United States v. Hemani, the Supreme Court ruled against the federal government’s attempt to broadly prohibit firearm possession by marijuana users. While that might seem far removed from our fight against knife restrictions, its unanimous decision was a huge victory that goes to the heart of our cases. Hemani made it clear that while the government may use analogies in the historical-tradition analysis in Bruen’s “Step Two,” any analogy must be comparable in whom it burdens, why it burdens them, and how it does so. This supports our cases by doubling down on SCOTUS’ Step Two test and reminds the courts that attempts to stretch these boundaries to a breaking point with inappropriate analogies are not allowed. In none of our cases do the government’s historical analogs meet this requirement. They are all bridges too far, either in terms of timing, being too far removed from the founding era, and/or when it comes to “who,” “why” and “how.” Read more








