By Alex GedimanNew Orleans, TX–(BUSINESS WIRE)– The US District Court for the Southern District of New Orleans today rejected a challenge to the state’s proposed gun-control law by the National Rifle Association (NRA), ruling that the measure, if passed, would be unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.
The NRA filed a motion to intervene on behalf of a Louisiana resident who sued the state, saying that the law would violate her constitutional rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
The law was filed on March 10, 2017, after a federal court found that the Louisiana gun-ban was unconstitutional.
Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards has said that the state intends to implement the law as soon as it passes, but has not specified when the measure would take effect.
The federal judge, Ronald Gould, issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state from implementing the law.
The state appealed the injunction to the Supreme Court, which will hear oral arguments on the issue this week.
In the meantime, the NRA will appeal the court’s decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In his ruling, Judge Gould noted that Louisiana’s gun-bans are unconstitutional because they target “a specific group of people who are armed and dangerous.”
He said that while the state is not obligated to enforce its gun-law prohibitions in the event of a federal lawsuit, the federal government is obligated to “ensure that no federal law or rule is enacted that would render the Louisiana laws void or invalid.”
Judge Gould noted in his order that the NRA had argued that the plaintiffs had a “legitimate and legitimate concern” that the proposed law would be implemented in violation of the Second and Fourteenth Amendments.
The judge wrote that while Louisiana’s proposed law is not a violation of any federal law, it does violate the Second or Fourteenth amendments.
He said the NRA’s position that “the Second Amendment protects the right of the citizen to bear an automatic firearm,” “is fundamentally wrong.”
In his order, Judge Gavriel Smith noted that the court had previously found that Louisiana had failed to demonstrate that the Second amendment “permit[s] a reasonable individual to be a licensed dealer in a firearm.”
Judge Smith wrote that the judge did not find Louisiana’s proposal to be “legitimately valid” and “unreasonably burdensome.”
“The court finds that Louisiana has failed to provide evidence of the substantial and significant burdens that the bill imposes on an individual’s right to carry a firearm,” he wrote.
The National Rifle Associations legal team, which argued in court that the gun-bill was unconstitutional, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Second Amendment is the right “to keep and bear arms,” the NRA said in a statement on Monday.
The lawsuit was filed by attorney Jason Danneman, who said that he had no intention of seeking to stop Louisiana from enacting its gun ban.
The plaintiffs said in court papers that the ban would infringe on the Second, Fourth, and Fourth Amendments and “will have a profound and chilling effect on the exercise of Second Amendment rights.”
Danneman’s lawsuit was not the only challenge to Louisiana’s bill.
On March 3, a federal judge in New Orleans ruled in favor of a lawsuit challenging the state law.
A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., had blocked the state in its lawsuit challenging that law on March 4.