The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider 24 firearms-related petitions at its private conference on Friday, November 6, according to the Duke Center for Firearms Law's SCOTUS Gun Watch for October 26. The Court issued no orders this Monday, and its next orders list is due November 2.
The batch is large, and most of it comes from criminal cases. Of the 24 petitions, 21 are captioned against the United States, meaning they come from federal prosecutions rather than civil suits by gun groups. The other three arise from state courts in Florida, New York and Washington.
Analysis: where the petitions come from
The newsroom tallied the 24 petitions on the Duke list by the court they come from.
Fifth Circuit: 5.
Tenth Circuit: 4.
Eleventh Circuit: 4.
Second Circuit: 3.
First Circuit: 2.
Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Circuits: 1 each.
State courts (Fla., N.Y., Wash.): 3.
Total: 24.
Most were filed between late July and early October. The oldest, Minor v. United States from the First Circuit, was filed April 27. Only one, Holloway v. Brown from Washington state (No. 26-300), carries a docket number outside the 5000s series that covers the rest.
Conference lists do not mean much on their own. The justices routinely deny dozens of gun petitions without comment. The Duke tracker shows a group of denials on October 5, more on October 13, and two more on October 19, including Beckwith v. Frey. Any of the 24 could be denied, granted, or quietly relisted for a later conference.
Why this batch matters now
The petitions arrive in a shifting legal landscape. On October 13, the full Third Circuit ruled that the federal ban on gun possession by people with felony convictions could not be applied to Edward Williams, whose record stemmed from drunk driving offenses in the early 2000s. Judge Paul Matey wrote that Williams was "a peaceable citizen, capable of bearing arms consistent with the design of the Second Amendment," Fox News reported. The court held the ban can be applied constitutionally where a prior conviction involved violence or threats.
The same day, the court upheld the ban for James Bost, whose record included terroristic threats tied to a 2002 carjacking. "The right to keep and bear arms has limits, and this is one," Judge Stephanos Bibas wrote. Judge Arianna Freeman wrote separately, arguing that offenses like drunk driving should also count because they can show a person "poses a credible threat to the physical safety of others."
Earlier this month, the justices also declined to disturb a Fifth Circuit ruling that a drug possession felony was not enough to take away a man's gun rights, a case we covered in Supreme Court Leaves in Place a Ruling That Limited the Federal Felon Gun Ban. Together, those rulings mean a person's right to own a gun can depend on which circuit he lives in. That kind of split is one of the main reasons the Court agrees to hear a case.
The cases being held
Several closely watched civil cases are not on the November 6 list. National Association for Gun Rights v. Lamont, Duncan v. Bonta and Gator's Custom Guns v. Washington were all listed for the June 29 conference, and the Duke tracker shows no later action. The Court often holds related petitions while it decides a lead case, then sends them back for reconsideration.
The lead case this term is the consolidated AR-15 challenge, Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, set for argument on the morning of December 2. We covered the briefing in Cook County and Connecticut Defend AR-15 Bans as Supreme Court Arguments Near. A decision is expected by the end of the term next summer.
Another petition, Novotny v. Moore from the Fourth Circuit, was listed for the October 16 conference and then rescheduled, according to the tracker.
What comes next
Results from the November 6 conference will appear in the Court's orders after the justices meet. A case granted this fall could still be argued and decided before the term ends next summer.
For defendants serving federal sentences on gun possession counts, the stakes are personal. For the government, the question is whether the justices will set a nationwide rule on who can be permanently disarmed, or keep leaving it to the circuits.
Two Taps News stories summarize reporting and the analysis discussed on Two Taps and Friends. They are not legal advice. Read our standards.
