United States v. Cox


FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS October 16, 2018 Elisabeth A. Shumaker FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court _________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. No. 17-3034 SHANE COX, Defendant - Appellant. ____________________ STATE OF KANSAS, Intervenor - Appellant. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. No. 17-3035 JEREMY KETTLER, Defendant - Appellant. ____________________ STATE OF KANSAS, Intervenor - Appellant. _________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Kansas (D.C. No. 6:15-CR-10150-JTM) _________________________________ Paige A. Nichols, Assistant Federal Public Defender (Melody Brannon, Federal Public Defender, with her on the briefs), Topeka, Kansas, for Defendant–Appellant Shane Cox. Joseph W. Miller of Law Offices of Joseph Miller, LLC, Fairbanks, Alaska (Robert J. Olson, William J. Olson, Jeremiah L. Morgan, Herbert W. Titus of William J. Olson, P.C., Vienna, Virginia, with him on the briefs) for Defendant–Appellant Jeremy Kettler. Derek Schmidt, Attorney General of Kansas, Jeffrey A. Chanay, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Toby Crouse, Solicitor General of Kansas, Dwight R. Carswell and Bryan C. Clark, Assistant Solicitors General, Topeka, Kansas, for Intervenor–Appellant. Elizabeth H. Danello, Attorney, Appellate Section, Criminal Division, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (Stephen R. McAllister, United States Attorney, District of Kansas, Jared S. Maag, Assistant United States Attorney, District of Kansas, Kenneth A. Blanco, Acting Assistant Attorney General, and Trevor N. McFadden, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., with her on the brief) for Plaintiff–Appellee. _________________________________ Before HARTZ, SEYMOUR, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge. _________________________________ This is a tale of two laws: the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. §§ 5801–5872, which requires the registration of statutorily defined firearms, and Kansas’s Second Amendment Protection Act (SAPA), ch. 100, 2013 Kan. Sess. Laws vol. 1 500–03 (codified at Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 50-1201 to -1211 (2014)), which purports to exempt any personal firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition manufactured, owned, and remaining within Kansas’s borders from “any federal law, . . . including any federal firearm or ammunition registration program, under the 2 authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce.” Kan. Stat. Ann. § 50-1204(a). In 2014, these two laws intersected when the government prosecuted two Kansas men, Shane Cox and Jeremy Kettler, for violating the NFA by manufacturing (in Kansas), transferring (in Kansas), and possessing (in Kansas) several unregistered firearms. A jury found them guilty of most (though not all) of the charges. Now, Cox and Kettler appeal their convictions, though they don’t dispute that their actions ran afoul of the NFA.1 First, they challenge the NFA’s constitutionality, alleging that the statute is an invalid exercise of congressional power and an invasion of the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Second, they challenge the district court’s ruling that their reliance on the SAPA, which they understood to shield Kansas-made and -owned firearms from federal regulation, provided no defense to charges that they violated the NFA. Kettler further asks us to see his prosecution as the product of a ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals