Judge’s Ruling Sparks Debate on Gun Rights for Non-Citizens

A recent ruling by a federal judge has determined that the Second Amendment does not extend its protections to an illegal immigrant who allegedly provided false information on a gun purchase form. Carlos Serrano-Restrepo, a foreign national residing in Orient, Ohio, has been living in the U.S. since April 2008. Over the years, he has established a business and purchased a home, yet his legal status remains unresolved as his asylum claim is still pending.

Despite his long-term residence in the U.S., Serrano-Restrepo’s actions have led to legal scrutiny. In 2023, he was granted permission to work legally in the country until March 2025, and he obtained a Social Security number. However, during this period, he also acquired a substantial number of firearms, reportedly for self-defense. On ATF Form 4473, he allegedly claimed U.S. citizenship and denied being unlawfully present in the country.

The discrepancies in his documentation prompted an investigation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). This resulted in the seizure of approximately 170 firearms and thousands of rounds of ammunition from his home. Subsequently, a grand jury indicted Serrano-Restrepo for firearm possession as an alien unlawfully in the U.S.

In response, Serrano-Restrepo’s attorney argued for the dismissal of the charges, maintaining that his client’s long-term residence and community ties should afford him Second Amendment protections. However, Judge Edmund A. Sargus Jr. rejected this motion.

“At the time the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, the Government contends that the Second Amendment did not protect the right to bear arms of ‘outsiders,’ such as Native Americans, Catholics, and Loyalists who refused to swear oaths of allegiance,” Judge Sargus articulated in his ruling. He further emphasized that “disarming unlawful immigrants like Mr. Serrano-Restrepo who have not sworn allegiance to the United States comports with the Nation’s history and tradition of firearm regulations.”

The ruling underscores a historical precedent where certain groups perceived as threats to national security were restricted from bearing arms. According to Judge Sargus, the lack of a formal oath of allegiance through naturalization means Serrano-Restrepo does not fall under the Second Amendment’s protection.

Steve Nolder, Serrano-Restrepo’s attorney, expressed his dissatisfaction with the decision, stating that his client “did not pose any danger” with his collection of firearms. Despite this, the ruling reflects the ongoing debate about the extent of constitutional rights for individuals without legal status in the U.S.

Let us know what you think, please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Source