Nevada Supreme Court rulings hand setbacks to gun-right defenders and anti-abortion activists

NPR News Report:

In a recent ruling, the Nevada Supreme Court upheld a state ban on “ghost guns,” overturning a lower court’s decision that favored a gun manufacturer’s argument that the 2021 law regulating firearm components without serial numbers was too broad and unconstitutionally vague.

The law, which had previously been struck down by a Lyon County District Judge, was challenged by Nevada-based gun manufacturer Polymer80 Inc., who argued that terms such as “blank,” “casting,” and “machined body” were not defined, and that the statute failed to specify what constitutes a “finished” frame or receiver.

However, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court determined that the language of the law was “readily understandable through ordinary usage and common understanding.” Chief Justice Lydia Stiglich explained in the ruling that the statutes only regulate conduct involving objects that are intended to become firearms and have not been imprinted with a serial number.

Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, a Democrat, praised the ruling, calling it a “win for public safety” and stating that the ban on “ghost guns” is a crucial piece of legislation for protecting Nevadans from violent crime.

On a separate issue, the Supreme Court also rejected a Carson City judge’s ruling that an initiative addressing abortion rights and reproductive health care was misleading and violated the requirement that it address a single subject. The court determined that the medical procedures considered in the initiative all relate to human reproduction and are germane to the initiative’s single subject of establishing a right to reproductive freedom.

Abortion rights advocates welcomed the decision, emphasizing the importance of reproductive freedom in all aspects of reproductive health care. The ruling will allow for a new, narrower initiative to move forward, which seeks to amend the state constitution to guarantee access to abortion through 24 weeks of pregnancy or later to protect the health of the pregnant person.

Despite the setback, a lawyer representing a group opposing the voter initiative expressed disappointment with the ruling, stating that it could lead to broad and deceptive initiative proposals in the future. The group intends to focus on educating voters about why they believe the proposal is bad law and policy for Nevadans.

Overall, the recent decisions by the Nevada Supreme Court have significant implications for gun regulation and reproductive rights in the state, setting legal guidelines for both issues moving forward.

Written by staticwire