Summary
The Ninth Circuit affirmed João Ricardo DeBorba’s convictions for unlawful firearm and ammunition possession, false statements in firearm transactions, a false claim to U.S. citizenship, and possession of an unregistered firearm silencer. The court held that controlling precedent foreclosed his Second Amendment challenges to firearm restrictions applicable to unlawfully present noncitizens and individuals subject to domestic-violence restraining orders. The court also rejected his Second Amendment and vagueness challenges to the National Firearms Act’s silencer-registration requirements.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(A), which prohibits firearm possession by noncitizens illegally or unlawfully in the United States, violates the Second Amendment facially or as applied to DeBorba.
- Whether DeBorba's materiality challenges to his false statements on firearm-purchase forms and his false claim to U.S. citizenship could succeed based on the Second Amendment.
- Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)(C) violates the Second Amendment as applied to DeBorba's possession of firearms while subject to domestic-violence restraining orders.
- Whether the National Firearms Act's silencer-registration requirements violate the Second Amendment.
- Whether the National Firearms Act's regulation of silencers is unconstitutionally vague as applied to DeBorba.
Holdings
- Section 922(g)(5)(A)'s prohibition on firearm and ammunition possession by noncitizens illegally or unlawfully in the United States is consistent with the Second Amendment and is constitutional both facially and as applied to DeBorba.
- DeBorba's materiality challenges fail because they depended on a Second Amendment argument foreclosed by the court's conclusion that § 922(g)(5)(A) constitutionally permits his disarmament based on his citizenship or immigration status.
- Section 922(g)(8)(C)(i) is constitutional as applied to DeBorba because the restraining order included a judicial finding that he represented a credible threat to the physical safety of the protected person.
- Section 922(g)(8)(C)(ii) is constitutional as applied to DeBorba because Washington's post-conviction domestic-violence no-contact orders reflect historical traditions of individual disarmament based on judicial dangerousness determinations and categorical disarmament based on legislatively presumed danger.
- The NFA's silencer-registration requirements do not violate the Second Amendment.
- DeBorba's vagueness challenge fails because the stipulated facts established that he knowingly possessed an unregistered silencer, and the statutory definition gave him fair notice that the device was regulated.
Key quotations
“While the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms is among our nation’s fundamental rights, its scope “is not unlimited” and does not allow any person “to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever.”” (5)
“For “[f]rom the common law onward,” those lacking legal status in the United States, like DeBorba, “have historically been disarmed unless and until they swore an oath of allegiance to the sovereign.”” (8)
“An individual found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.” (10)
“The “Tick Suppressor” label on the box containing the device, which was found among other guns and accessories, made clear the purpose for which the device was intended.” (15)
Factual background
DeBorba entered the United States in 1999, overstayed his tourist visa in 2000, and never regained lawful immigration status. He obtained a Washington concealed-pistol license and completed firearm forms falsely identifying himself as a U.S. citizen. After domestic-violence proceedings resulted in restraining orders containing a credible-threat finding and firearm-possession prohibitions, federal agents searched his apartment and found firearms, ammunition, and an unregistered silencer labeled "Tick Suppressor."
Procedural history
A federal grand jury indicted DeBorba for firearm and ammunition possession offenses, false statements in firearm-purchase forms, making a false claim to U.S. citizenship, and possession of an unregistered firearm silencer. The district court denied his efforts to dismiss the charges, and DeBorba was convicted after a bench trial on stipulated facts. The Ninth Circuit reviewed the constitutional, materiality, and vagueness issues de novo and affirmed.