United States v. Vongxay

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that reasoning of Silveira with respect to Second Amendment had been invalidated by Heller
• concluding that an “examination . . . of historical gun restrictions” supports 5 upholding 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) as constitutional
• holding that § 922(g)(1)’s prohibition on the possession of firearms by felons comports with the Second Amendment
• stating that this circuit “declined to make a distinction between violent and non-violent felons” for purposes of analyzing Second Amendment challenges to § 922(g)(1)
• stating that “felons are categorically different from the individuals who have a fundamental right to bear arms,” and upholding § 922(g)(1) against a Second Amendment challenge
• explaining that the defendant Peter Vongxay had been previously 28 1 ||(Gnternal quotations omitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).