The Court has issued a GVR, which stands for Give certiorari, Vacate, and Remand. The case is Caetano v. Massachussetts (2016). Essentially, they are directing that a stun gun is ca protected arm, in a case involving a homeless person with one, in violation of state law. The GVR specifically rejects the idea that stun guns are not protected because they were not around in 1791, rejects that they are unprotected as "dangerous or unusual" weapons, and rejected that they were not protected because they were not military weapons.
Even better the defendant had the stun gun rto protect herself from a stalking boyfriend.
At the level of the Supremes, has there been any other sign since McDonald v. Chicago? I can't remember any, but you follow this much more closely than I.
ReplyDelete