2nd Amendment does not protect illegal alien who allegedly lied on gun form, judge rules



An illegal alien who has lived in the U.S. for nearly two decades is not protected under the Second Amendment, a federal judge has ruled.

Carlos Serrano-Restrepo is a foreign national who currently resides in Orient, Ohio, about an hour east of Springfield, having last crossed the border to enter the U.S. in April 2008. Since then, he has bought a home and opened a business that helps remediate fire and flood damage, according to WSYX.

He previously lived in Arizona but moved to Ohio in 2022, under the Biden-Harris administration, and filed an asylum claim, fully 14 years after his arrival in the U.S. That claim remains pending.

In 2023, the Biden-Harris Department of Homeland Security approved Serrano-Restrepo's application to work legally in the U.S., at least until March 2025, and the Social Security Administration approved his application for a Social Security number.

'The swearing of an oath of allegiance occurs through the naturalization process, not through his asylum application or his years of living in the United States.'

Around this time, Serrano-Restrepo also managed to amass a significant assortment of firearms, some of which were reportedly purchased for self-defense. During these purchases, he allegedly stated on ATF Form 4473 "that he had citizenship in the United States and that he was neither unlawfully in the United States, nor admitted under a nonimmigrant visa," court documents said.

After obtaining an Ohio driver's license, Serrano-Restrepo once again filled out the form, allegedly claiming he had dual citizenship in the U.S. and Colombia and that he "was not unlawfully in the United States or admitted under a nonimmigrant visa."

The purchase of at least 22 firearms and the apparent lies about citizenship on the forms caught the attention of the ATF, which began investigating him.

Last January, ATF agents seized approximately 170 weapons, many of which were displayed in gun safes and closets, and thousands of rounds of ammunition from his residence. In July, a grand jury indicted Serrano-Restrepo for possession of a firearm by an alien unlawfully in the U.S.

His attorney then filed a motion to dismiss the charges, arguing that even though Serrano-Restrepo is in the country illegally, he is protected under the Second Amendment since he "has been part of the national community and developed sufficient connections with the United States to be considered part of its community."

On Thursday, Judge Edmund A. Sargus Jr. of the Eastern Division of the Southern District of Ohio denied that motion to dismiss. Citing the 2022 Bruen decision of the Supreme Court, which severely restricts when the government can regulate gun ownership in America, Sargus claimed that the U.S. has a history of preventing groups of "outsiders" deemed to be national security threats from arming themselves.

"At the time the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, the Government contends that the Second Amendment did not protect the right to bear arms of 'outsiders,' such as Native Americans, Catholics, and Loyalists who refused to swear oaths of allegiance," Sargus wrote. "These outsiders were disarmed because they were perceived as dangerous to public safety or social stability, and thus not trusted to possess firearms."

In the same way, the U.S. government is within its rights to restrict Serrano-Restrepo, an illegal alien outsider who has never sworn a formal oath of allegiance to America, from bearing arms, Sargus ruled.

"Disarming unlawful immigrants like Mr. Serrano-Restrepo who have not sworn allegiance to the United States comports with the Nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulations," Sargus continued. "Mr. Serrano-Restrepo’s as-applied challenge lacks merit. The swearing of an oath of allegiance occurs through the naturalization process, not through his asylum application or his years of living in the United States."

Serrano-Restrepo's trial is scheduled to begin January 21, 2025.

Steve Nolder, an attorney representing Serrano-Restrepo, told Blaze News that his client "did not pose any danger" with his weapons collection and that he is "very disappointed" with Judge Sargus' decision.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Thomas Matthew Crooks, suspected shooter at Trump rally, reportedly had explosives in his car and residence



The suspect in the attempted assassination Saturday of former President Donald Trump used a gun his father purchased, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing individuals familiar with the investigation.

A Secret Service sniper killed 20-year-old suspect Thomas Matthew Crooks at Trump's rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, officials told CBS News, which added that multiple law enforcement sources said the gunman was armed with a semi-automatic AR-15 rifle and opened fire from a shed's roof outside the cordoned-off rally area.

'We do not currently have an identified motive,' Kevin Rojek, FBI Pittsburgh special agent in charge, said at a briefing late Saturday night, according to CBS News.

ABC News, citing multiple law enforcement sources, reported that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives conducted an urgent trace and found the suspect's father legally purchased the gun recovered at the scene.

Reuters said Crooks' father — 53-year-old Matthew Crooks — told CNN he was trying to figure out what happened and would wait until he spoke to law enforcement before speaking about his son.

Trump survived the shooting but was seen on video bleeding from his ear after which Secret Service whisked him away from the rally stage. Officials said one audience member was killed and two were in critical condition. CBS News, citing police, said the victims were all men, but their names haven't been released.

The FBI said Crooks is from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, CBS News noted. Bethel Park is about a half hour south of Pittsburgh and just over an hour south of Butler where the rally took place. The Washington Post reported that authorities by early Sunday had "sealed off the area around the alleged shooter’s home. Local fire department vehicles blocked access for several blocks, allowing only residents and investigators to enter."

The Secret Service and FBI are speaking with the suspect's family, the FBI has secured his home, and federal law enforcement is searching it, CBS News said, citing a law enforcement official. CNN, citing multiple law enforcement sources, reported that the suspect had explosive material inside his car and residence.

Fox News, citing voting records, reported that Thomas Matthew Crooks was a registered Republican, adding that he only took part in the Nov. 8, 2022, state election due to his age. Reuters — citing a 2021 Federal Election Commission filing — added that Crooks at age 17 made a $15 donation to ActBlue, a "political action committee that raises money for left-leaning and Democratic politicians." The outlet added that the donation was for the Progressive Turnout Project, a national group that rallies Democrats to vote. Reuters reported that the groups didn't immediately respond to request for comment.

More from Fox News:

Crooks graduated from Bethel Park High School in 2022. He was one of nearly two dozen students from the school to earn a $500 "star award" from the National Math and Science Initiative.

An online recording of his graduation ceremony shows him walking the stage to minimal applause and briefly posing with a school official, the New York Times reported.

A search by Fox News Digital revealed Crooks would have turned 21 years old this September. He had no reported criminal or traffic citations and no reported bankruptcies, liens or foreclosures.

"We do not currently have an identified motive," Kevin Rojek, FBI Pittsburgh special agent in charge, said at a briefing late Saturday night, according to CBS News.

A law enforcement official said early Sunday that there are so far no known foreign terrorism ties, the suspect was not on law enforcement's radar, and authorities are still running down his name, CBS News added.

The FBI's statement on Crooks also said "this remains an active and ongoing investigation, and anyone with information that may assist with the investigation is encouraged to submit photos or videos online at FBI.gov/butler or call 1-800-CALL-FBI."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Supreme Court Rules Bump Stock Ban Unlawful

"Nothing changes when a semiautomatic rifle is equipped with a bump stock."

Supreme Court strikes down bump stock ban — then Justice Alito delivers the crucial detail: 'There is a simple remedy'



The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a federal ban on bump stocks.

In December 2018, the Trump administration outlawed bump stocks via an ATF rule that declared the device to be a "machine gun," thus making bump stocks illegal under federal law. The case, Garland v. Cargill, made its way to the Supreme Court after a U.S. district court initially ruled in the government's favor, a decision with which the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed.

'When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck.'

The central issue in the case is whether a bump stock device fits the definition of "machine gun."

In a 6-3 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that the ATF exceeded its statutory authority because bump stock devices do not meet the statutory definition of a "machine gun as defined in 26 U.S.C §5845(b)."

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion.

Using the statutory definition of a machine gun — any firearm capable of firing "automatically more than one shot ... by a single function of the trigger" — Thomas explained why a bump stock doesn't satisfy the definition.

He wrote:

A semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock doesnot fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger.” With or without a bump stock, a shooter must releaseand reset the trigger between every shot. And, any subsequent shot fired after the trigger has been released and reset is the result of a separate and distinct “function of thetrigger.” All that a bump stock does is accelerate the rateof fire by causing these distinct “function[s]” of the triggerto occur in rapid succession.

This is the critical distinction between fully automatic firearms and semi-automatic firearms.

Fully automatic firearms discharge all of their available ammunition with one pull of the trigger. Semi-automatic firearms, on the other hand, fire only one round each time the trigger is pulled. A bump stock increases the rate of fire of a semi-automatic firearm by using the recoil of the firearm essentially to "bump" the trigger to the finger rapidly. But the core mechanics of the firearm — a single bullet discharged per trigger pull — are not modified.

Importantly, Thomas wrote that even if a semi-automatic firearm equipped with a bump stock fired with a single function of the trigger, it doesn't do so "automatically."

"[A] semiautomatic rifle cannot fire more than one shot 'automatically ... by a single function of the trigger' because the shooter must do more than simply engage the trigger one time. The same is true of a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock," Thomas wrote.

Moreover, Thomas noted the ATF changed its position on bump stocks after the 2017 Las Vegas mass killing despite having previously argued "on more than 10 separate occasions over several administrations" that bump stocks did not meet the statutory definition of "machine gun."

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the dissenting opinion. The court's other two left-leaning justices — Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — joined her.

Despite the majority's technical and mechanical explanation of why a bump stock does not satisfy the statutory definition of "machine gun," Sotomayor opened her dissenting opinion by making a significant accusation.

"Today, the Court puts bump stocks back in civilian hands," she claimed.

"When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck," she added.

However, unlike the majority, Sotomayor eschewed the technical mechanics of firearms — even writing at one point, "Regardless of what is happening in the internal mechanics of a firearm" — and tried to redefine the statute. She argued that a "single function of the trigger" actually means "a single action by the shooter to initiate a firing sequence."

Moreover, Sotomayor fearmongered that the ruling "will have deadly consequences" while bemoaning that it "hamstrings" the government.

But the one concurring opinion in the case, written by Justice Samuel Alito, proves the ruling does no such thing.

According to Alito, there is a "simple remedy" to outlaw bump stocks.

"There is a simple remedy for the disparate treatment of bump stocks and machineguns. Congress can amend the law — and perhaps would have done so already if ATF had stuck with its earlier interpretation," Alito wrote.

"Now that the situation is clear, Congress can act," he added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hunter Biden trial: Exes testify to his drug habits; FBI agent, former gun shop employee weigh in as well



First son Hunter Biden — a man who detailed his struggles with drug addiction in his 2021 memoir, "Beautiful Things" — is currently standing trial in Delaware for three charges related to allegedly lying on a federal form and illegally possessing a weapon for a brief period in late 2018. Day three of that trial has now concluded after testimony from two of Biden's exes as well as an FBI agent and the former gun shop employee who sold Biden the firearm.

'Unlawful user of, or addicted to': Biden allegedly lies on ATF form

On October 12, 2018, Hunter Biden walked into StarQuest Shooters in Wilmington, Delaware, and paid cash for a Colt revolver. As part of the purchasing process, Biden had to fill out a form required by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that asks a number of questions regarding drug use.

One such question asks whether the purchaser is "an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance." The "no" box was checked in response to that question on Biden's form.

Buhle claimed Biden attempted to conceal his addiction from friends and family but that he became 'angry' and 'short-tempered' whenever he was under the influence.

Prosecutors have thus far attempted to demonstrate that Biden was abusing street drugs, particularly crack, at the time the weapon was purchased and therefore lied when he claimed on the form that he was not a drug addict.

Biden's attorneys, by contrast, have attempted to argue that Biden was abusing alcohol at the time, not illegal substances like crack. They've also suggested that Biden didn't see himself as an addict at the time he purchased the gun and therefore didn't lie, CNN reported.

'Found a crack pipe': Two exes take the stand

Two of Biden's former romantic partners testified for the prosecution on Wednesday: ex-wife Kathleen Buhle and ex-girlfriend Zoe Kestan. Buhle had been subpoenaed to testify while Kestan agreed to testify after receiving an immunity deal.

Buhle and Biden were married for nearly 25 years, from 1993 until 2017, and have three daughters together. Though Buhle mentioned that Biden had discussed entering rehab at least as far back as 2003 and noted that he had been dismissed from the Navy in 2014 because of alleged cocaine use, she said on the stand that she became particularly alarmed after she "found a crack pipe ... on an ashtray on the side porch of [their] home" in July 2015.

After that, Buhle testified that she repeatedly discovered drugs and/or drug paraphernalia in Biden's car and that she had to remove those items on several occasions to keep Biden's drug problem from their daughters. Buhle claimed Biden attempted to conceal his addiction from friends and family but that he became "angry" and "short-tempered" whenever he was under the influence.

Buhle also claimed that though Biden had moved out of their home shortly after she discovered the crack pipe, the couple went to therapy to try and work through their problems. During these therapy sessions, they did discuss Biden's drug habit, she claimed. However, she didn't really consider them to be officially separated until she "found out about the infidelity," she claimed.

On cross-examination, Buhle admitted that she had never personally witnessed Biden use drugs.

Kestan, on the other hand, who met Biden while she worked at a strip club in late 2017, claimed that she frequently saw Biden use crack.

Early in their relationship, though, Biden didn't use quite as often, she said, because they were so "focused on each other." He even told her she was a welcome "distraction" from his addiction, she claimed.

However, the extent of Biden's addiction was soon laid bare. During some of their rendezvouses together in the spring and summer of 2018, Biden would use crack "every 20 minutes or so," she claimed.

'Do drug dealers accept credit cards?'

During that time, she was often asked to help facilitate his addiction by meeting up with dealers or going to ATMs to collect money for drug purchases, she said. In May 2018, Biden even asked her to clean up a hotel room after he had fixed up a batch of crack the night before. That day, Kestan snapped a photo of the hotel room, claiming she was "very angry" that he had left her to clean up his mess. That photo was shared in open court.

By the time the two were sharing Biden's rental home in Malibu, Kestan had had enough and decided to move back to New York. She left either September 22 or 23, 2018, and Biden was still using crack as regularly as ever, she claimed. Her testimony indicated that in the weeks leading up to the gun purchase, Biden was still actively engaging in drug abuse.

Despite his unsavory requests and drug habits, Kestan repeatedly described Biden as "charming."

"Everybody loved him," she insisted.

A dead brother's wife, an FBI agent, and a dealer named 'Mookie'

Though she hasn't testified at Biden's trial, Hallie Biden — the widow of Biden's late brother, Beau, and who also had a romantic relationship with Hunter after her husband's death — still made an indirect appearance in court this week when FBI special agent Erika Jensen read some text messages Hunter Biden sent Hallie in October 2018 that suggest drug purchases and/or drug use.

In one message, Biden told Hallie he was meeting a drug dealer named "Mookie" at a ballpark near Wilmington. In another, he told her he was smoking crack and sleeping on a car parked in downtown Wilmington.

On cross-examination, Biden's attorney Abbe Lowell forced Jensen to admit she did not personally know whether Biden had ever actually done any of those things or whether he had just told Hallie he had. When he asked Jensen whether she even knew whether Mookie is a real person, she said she did not.

Lowell also noted during cross-examination of Jensen that while ample credit card and receipt evidence demonstrates that Biden was actively involved in alcohol addiction in October 2018 and that photos and statements attest to his drug addiction before and after that month, almost no evidence exists that he was actively engaged in drug addiction when he purchased the gun.

On redirect, prosecutor Derek Hines tacitly noted that people buying drugs often pay in cash to avoid leaving a paper trail. "Do drug dealers accept credit cards?" he asked Jensen.

"Not in my experience," she replied.

'Might as well': Former gun shop employee recalls Hunter's visit

Finally, Gordon Cleveland, the former StarQuest Shooters employee who sold Biden the gun, took the stand for the prosecution.

Cleveland claimed he did not recognize Biden when he entered the store but that after Biden explained what he was looking for, he was able to offer Biden several options. Biden eventually settled on the Colt.

Cleveland denied that the boxes on Biden's form already had checkmarks.

Cleveland also recalled explaining to Biden his ammunition options as well. He acknowledged that when he worked at the store, he often encouraged gun buyers to pick up some ammo at the same time.

"If you’re gonna buy a gun you might as well buy the ammunition. Because, what are you gonna do? Throw it at somebody?" he joked.

Defense attorney Lowell had previously suggested in court that the boxes on Biden's ATF form had already been checked by the time he went to fill it out. For evidence, Lowell pointed to the different colored pens used on the form and the seemingly different handwriting styles on it.

However, Cleveland denied that the boxes on Biden's form already had checkmarks and claimed he personally watched Biden fill out the form, including all the drug-related questions.

Anything else?

Prosecutors claimed they have six more witness, none of whom is expected to testify for very long. The defense team is thus preparing to call their first witnesses perhaps as early as Friday.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hunter Biden Employs the Bill Clinton Defense in First Day of Criminal Trial

Hunter Biden’s attorney took a page out of former president Bill Clinton’s playbook on Monday, telling jurors that his client’s case hinges on what the definition of the word "is" is.

The post Hunter Biden Employs the Bill Clinton Defense in First Day of Criminal Trial appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

Here’s Everything You Need To Know About Hunter Biden’s Criminal Gun Trial

[rebelmouse-proxy-image https://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Screenshot-2024-06-04-at-6.37.35 AM-1200x675.png crop_info="%7B%22image%22%3A%20%22https%3A//thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Screenshot-2024-06-04-at-6.37.35%5Cu202fAM-1200x675.png%22%7D" expand=1]Will the Biden son finally face accountability this time?

Blaze News original: Ditch the UN and terminate the Education Department — conservative fighters seek to slay the federal leviathan



While conservatives desire dramatic decreases in the size and scope of the federal leviathan — such as the abolition of the Department of Education and the extrication of the U.S. from the United Nations — accomplishing those objectives has been an elusive goal as the big government status quo prevails and America's national debt balloons with no end in sight.

But some members of Congress are fighting to roll back the massive government monstrosity.

One of those lawmakers is Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas.

During a phone interview with Blaze News, Roy noted "two reasons to cut spending." He first pointed to the nation's rapidly expanding $34.5 trillion national debt and then noted that slashing spending has the benefit of stopping the funding of entities that kill people's way of life. But Roy described his GOP colleagues as "too spineless" for such action.

The conservative congressman said he thinks "Republicans care more about" having power than actually wielding it to accomplish anything.

He told Blaze News that the U.S. "should end most foreign aid" and ax much of the country's federal government. He also suggested the U.S. should adopt a "simple tax code" such as a flat tax or national sales tax.

Roy put forward a measure late last year that would get the U.S. out of the U.N. and cut off the spigot of American dollars flowing to the globalist organization. GOP Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama was an original cosponsor.

Roy told Blaze News that the U.N. operates in "direct opposition" to the well-being of the U.S. 90% of the time.

"The President shall terminate all membership by the United States in the United Nations, and in any organ, specialized agency, commission, or other formally affiliated body of the United Nations," a portion of the measure, dubbed the "Disengaging Entirely From the United Nations Debacle Act of 2023," reads.

"No funds are authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for assessed or voluntary contributions of the United States to the United Nations or to any organ, specialized agency, commission or other formally affiliated body of the United Nations, except that funds may be appropriated to facilitate termination of United States membership and withdrawal of United States personnel and equipment, in accordance with sections 2 and 3, respectively," the proposal states.

But while such a move would likely inspire cheers among the conservative grassroots, the measure has so far languished in the House without coming up for a vote, even as Republicans hold the majority in the chamber.

Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, who pushed the U.N.-withdrawal measure in the Senate, has suggested on X that the Transportation Security Administration should be abolished.

"It's time to abolish the TSA. Airlines can and will secure their own planes if a federal agency doesn't do it for them. They'll do it better than TSA, without undermining the Constitution and with less groping—showing more respect for passengers," Lee tweeted.

— (@)

GOP Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky — who is one of the cosponsors of the proposal to withdraw the U.S. from the U.N. — wants to abolish the Department of Education and has pushed a succinct bill that would do just that.

"The Department of Education shall terminate on December 31, 2023," the text of the measure declares.

While speaking to Blaze News, Roy, who is one of the original cosponsors, indicated that states should bear responsibility for handling the issue of education.

When Massie reintroduced the proposal to terminate the department last year, original Republican cosponsors included Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona, Rep. Dan Bishop of North Carolina, Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Rep. Eric Burlison of Missouri, Rep. Harriet Hageman of Wyoming, Rep. Rich McCormick of Georgia, Rep. Mary Miller of Illinois, and Rep. Roy.

The bill has not received a House vote.

Last year, while considering the "Parents Bill of Rights Act," the chamber voted on a proposed amendment that read, "It is the sense of Congress that the authority of the Department of Education and the Secretary of Education to operate or administer any office or program related to elementary or secondary education should be terminated on or before December 31, 2023."

Ultimately, the proposed amendment failed in a 161-265 vote, as 60 Republicans joined with 205 Democrats to defeat it.

"During the open appropriations process under Kevin McCarthy, I was able to secure, for the first time since its creation, a floor vote on whether the Department of Education should exist," Massie told Blaze News. "I was encouraged that the measure received 161 votes."

The Congressional Research Service has noted, "Even if a 'sense of' provision is incorporated into a bill that becomes law, such provisions merely express the opinion of Congress or the relevant chamber. They have no formal effect on public policy and have no force of law."

In explaining the difference between his bill that would "terminate" the Education Department and the failed amendment, Massie wrote to Blaze News, "The wording is different. This was necessary to skirt ridiculously applied budget rules on my amendment which came for a vote. Specifically, CBO said eliminating the Dept of Education will increase mandatory spending in the budget window, because they said it would cause massive early retirement payouts," he noted, adding a facepalm emoji. "So we had to change it to a sense of Congress among other things," he wrote.

"It was a struggle to get it to the floor. I had to adjust the language multiple times to overcome what I consider to be dilatory efforts from my own party to keep this off the floor," Massie continued. "Had I not been on the rules committee, and if not for support from Kevin McCarthy for openness in the processes, it would have never received a vote."

"The underlying bill was about forcing local schools to publish their curricula and books in their library. I was opposed to that bill because it presumed the dept of education would enforce that new requirement," Massie wrote. "I said if they gave me a vote on eliminating the department, I would vote for the underlying bill."

Last year, Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida put forward a measure to abolish the ATF.

"The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is hereby abolished," the measure reads.

The bill has not come up for a vote in the GOP-majority House.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!