The Supreme Court’s Order in Relation to Lara v. PSP, Explained

Posted on by Joshua Prince, Esq.

As there has been a lot of confusion and misinformation regarding the U.S. Supreme Court’s Order yesterday in Lara, et al v. PSP Commissioner, I thought it prudent to explain what actually occurred and what it means.

First and foremost, the Order did not address the merits of the matter. Rather, as is customary when the U.S. Supreme Court issues a recent decision (in this case, U.S. v. Rahimi) that could have bearing on other pending cases, the Court GVRs (Grants, Vacates, and Remands) those other pending appeals, so that the lower courts have opportunity to address the new precedent, before necessitating the Court’s review of the matters. As several federal appellate courts have recognized, the issuance of a GVR does not speak to the underlying merits of the case and does not necessitate an automatic reversal.

In fact, in this regard, there were eight pending Second Amendment-related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, including cases upholding and striking down firearm laws, in both the civil and criminal context, when Rahimi was decided. All of those cases were almost immediately GVR’ed, including Doss v. U.S., 23-6842 (U.S. July 2, 2024), where the Eighth Circuit found 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) was constitutional in relation to an individual with numerous felony convictions. The issuance of the GVR in Doss was not the U.S. Supreme Court declaring that the Eighth Circuit was wrong and that the law should be held to be unconstitutional; but rather, the Court wanted the Eighth Circuit to analyze the law under its most recent precedent, before considering whether it would review the matter.

In relation to Lara, while the Third Circuit had already decided the case before the Rahimi decision was issued, as the Commissioner had not yet appealed it to the U.S. Supreme Court, there was some delay in the Court issuing the GVR. Regardless, as the  Rahimi decision does not change the outcome in relation to the Lara matter, we expect for the Third Circuit to affirm its prior decision that the Second Amendment’s protections apply to 18 to 20 year olds, now under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Rahimi.

I hope this helps better explain what actually occurred, as it can be very confusing and some people start to read into it something that it is not. 

If your state or federal constitutional rights have been violated, contact FICG today to discuss your options.

Firearms Industry Consulting Group® (FICG®) is a registered trademark and division of Civil Rights Defense Firm, P.C., with rights and permissions granted to Prince Law Offices, P.C. to use in this article.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Joshua Prince, Esq.

With our 2nd Amendment rights being attacked at both the Federal and State level, and the ATF (Burea of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) trying to close down FFLs (Federal Firearms Licensees) for minor infractions while making FFLs the scapegoat when the ATF's records are inaccurate, I want to take this opportunity to introduce myself. I am one of only a handful of attorneys across the US that practices in the niche area of law known as firearms law. I decided to concentrate my legal practice on firearms law not only because I am a shooter and firearms enthusiast, but also to ensure that our inalienable Right to Keep and Bear Arms is never encroached upon. I handle cases at the Federal and State level for both FFLs and individuals. At the federal and state levels for individuals, I actively defend the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution and Section 21 of the PA Constitution, as well as, help individuals with: - License to Carry Firearms Denials; - Challenges to Erroneous PICS Denials; - Relief from Firearms Disabilities; - Estate Planning Advice; - Gun/NFA Trusts; and - 42 USC 1983 Actions for Deprivation of Civil Rights At both the state and federal levels, I represent FFLs and SOTs throughout Pennsylvania and the US regarding: - ATF Compliance Inspections; - Warning Letters and Hearings; - FFL Revocations; - Corporate Structure Advice - Indoor/Outdoor Range Implementation; and - Forfeiture Proceedings In following my love for firearms and firearms law, I have taught several Continuing Legal Education (CLE) seminars on Firearms in Estates and Trusts and Firearms Law 101 for several Bar Associations, including Berks, Cumberland, and Dauphin Counties. I also planned and taught several Firearms in Estates CLE classes for the Pennsylvania Bar Institute (PBI). While at Widener Law School, I was a member of the Widener Law Journal. I wrote an article on the Inaccuracy of the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR). I also had an article published on Fee Disputes in Workers Compensation cases in the Widener Law Journal, Volume 18, No. 2. You can often find me posting on several internet forums, including Subguns, Uzitalk, AR15, and PAFOA. I also hold PA Firearms Law classes for local ranges to inform the public on the firearm laws of the Commonwealth. Following in my father's footsteps, I am also a Board member for the Pottstown Police Athletic League (PAL).

One thought on “The Supreme Court’s Order in Relation to Lara v. PSP, Explained”

Leave a reply to Talan Cancel reply