Supreme Court rules felons can transfer gun ownership

The US Supreme Court unanimously ruled Monday that felons can transfer gun ownership instead of turning weapons over to authorities.

Joshua Roberts/Reuters
The Supreme Court is seen in Washington on May 18, 2015.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that convicted felons may be able to transfer their guns to someone else rather than surrendering them to authorities, siding with a former U.S. Border Patrol agent from Florida convicted on marijuana charges.

Writing for the court in the 9-0 ruling, Justice Elena Kagan said a federal law prohibiting felons from possessing firearms did not prevent ownership of guns from being transferred to another person.

Kagan said a transfer could take place as long as the judge overseeing the case ensures that the felon cannot retain control over the use of the weapons.

The case involved Tony Henderson, who in 2007 pleaded guilty to distributing marijuana and other drug offenses and was sentenced to six months in prison. He voluntarily surrendered 19 firearms to the FBI after he was arrested on drug charges. But after he was convicted, Henderson sought to sell the guns either to a friend or to transfer ownership to his wife.

"What matters here is not whether a felon plays a role in deciding where his firearms should go next," Kagan wrote. Rather, the question is "whether the felon will have the ability to use or direct the use of his firearms after the transfer," she added.

The case will return to lower courts to determine if Henderson's request to transfer the guns will be granted.

A federal judge had refused Henderson's request that he be able to sell the guns, as did the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a ruling this past January.

The case is Henderson v. United States, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 13-1487.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.