At issue is 18 USC. § 922(g)(5), which prohibits anyone “who, being an alien, is illegally or unlawfully in the United States” from “possess[ing] in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”

On June 1, 2020,  Heriberto Carbajal-Flores was arrested in West Chicago’s Little Village neighborhood under unclear circumstances and charged with being an illegal alien in possession of a handgun. Carbajal-Flores claimed that he was carrying for self-defense and protection of property as the mostly peaceful Black Lives Matter riots raged across the country and that the Second Amendment permitted him to do so.

His initial pleading before Judge Coleman didn’t go well. In April 2022, she denied his motion to dismiss. Then Bruen happened.

BACKGROUND:

BREAKING: SCOTUS Strikes Down New York State Concealed Carry Law, Biggest 2A Victory Since Heller 

Supreme Court Rules You Can’t ‘Bear’ Arms Unless You Can Carry Them for Self-Defense

Judge Coleman took another look at the case.

Upon review, Coleman concluded that Carbajal-Flores’ illegally present status was not sufficient to deny him Second Amendment rights. The judge said the “plain text” of the Constitution “presumptively protects firearms possession by undocumented persons.”

“Carbajal-Flores has never been convicted of a felony, a violent crime, or a crime involving the use of a weapon. Even in the present case, Carbajal-Flores contends that he received and used the handgun solely for self-protection and protection of property during a time of documented civil unrest in the Spring of 2020,” the judge wrote. “Additionally, Pretrial Service has confirmed that Carbajal-Flores has consistently adhered to and fulfilled all the stipulated conditions of his release, is gainfully employed, and has no new arrests or outstanding warrants.”

The court determined that because there is insufficient evidence to suggest Carbajal-Flores is a danger to society, there is no historical analogue that would permit the federal government to deny him his gun rights.

“The Court finds that Carbajal-Flores’ criminal record, containing no improper use of a weapon, as well as the non-violent circumstances of his arrest do not support a finding that he poses a risk to public safety such that he cannot be trusted to use a weapon responsibly and should be deprived of his Second Amendment right to bear arms in self-defense,” Judge Coleman wrote. “Thus, this Court finds that, as applied to Carbajal-Flores, Section 922(g)(5) is unconstitutional.”

IANAL, but this is Bizarro World Martian Logic. The same law that bars illegals from gun ownership does the same to convicted felons and veterans with a dishonorable discharge. As Carbajal-Flores was, by definition, participating in illegal activity, it would seem that Coleman’s ruling would also apply to convicted felons. How Coleman can find that the law is constitutional but the way the law is applied to illegals is unconstitutional beggars the imagination.

Again, IANAL, but this looks like more of the trolling-by-legal opinion that neo-Marxist judges like to do. Coleman used the language of Bruen, like describing Carabajal-Flores as “law abiding” and claiming barring illegals from gun ownership was not “consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

It will be interesting to see if the Biden Justice Department appeals this decision.