A federal judge in Illinois has ruled that an illegal migrant’s Second Amendment rights were violated after he was charged with possessing a firearm. On March 8, District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman dismissed the case against Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, who was caught carrying a handgun in Chicago in 2020.
According to Newsmax, Prosecutors charged Carbajal-Flores with 18 U.S.C § 922 or “Unlawful Acts” which “bars illegal immigrants from carrying guns or ammunition.”
Although Carbajal-Flores filed to dismiss the indictment on two occasions, once in April 2022 and again the following December, the court granted his third motion to dismiss because he allegedly obtained the firearm for “self-protection and protection of property during a time of documented civil unrest in the Spring of 2020.”
The ruling also noted that while Carbajal-Flores resides in the U.S. illegally, his “criminal record reflects no felony convictions,” he has “consistently adhered to and fulfilled all the stipulated conditions of his release, continually “provides the necessary documentation to verify his income when requested,” and a recent criminal record check displayed “no new arrests or outstanding warrants.”
Pointing to past Supreme Court rulings, which declared that “stripping a man convicted of a nonviolent crime of his gun rights [is] unconstitutional,” Carbajal-Flores’ lawyers reminded the courts that disarming an individual based on their American citizenship “does not have roots in the history and tradition of the United States.”
As a result, Judge Coleman, who was appointed by former president Barack Obama in 2010, granted Carbajal-Flors’ motion to dismiss: “The noncitizen possession statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), violates the Second Amendment as applied to Carbajal-Flores. Thus, the court grants Carbajal-Flores’ motion to dismiss.”
Coleman’s decision shocked many on X, who expressed their disappointment at the legal system.
“Call me anti-constitution but I just don’t think it’s a good idea to allow an invading army legal protections at all, let alone the right to carry guns. Just my 2 cents,” wrote The Publica co-founder Jeremy Hambly.
“Democrats don’t want gun control for illegals, just law-abiding citizens. Vote accordingly,” wrote another political commentator by the handle @DogRightGirl.
Despite the widespread backlash, attorney Matthew Larosiere said he agreed with the court’s ruling.
In an analysis for The Reload, a publication dedicated to reporting on firearms policy and politics in America, Larosiere expressed that all immigrants, including illegals, are “part of the people” and that they should be protected by the constitution.
“To find that illegal immigrants are outside of ‘the people’ protected by the Second Amendment, you must believe that the Framers were talking about a different ‘people’ in the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments,” he wrote, adding that no laws existed regarding “the possession of firearms by immigration status until 1968.”
