In a recent decision, the Supreme Court has chosen not to hear a challenge to an assault weapons ban in Illinois, marking a development in the ongoing debate surrounding Second Amendment rights. The court has instead decided to send various gun cases back to lower courts, including a challenge to the law used to convict Hunter Biden.

This decision comes after the justices upheld a gun law aimed at protecting victims of domestic violence. This was the first firearms rights case following a significant ruling two years ago that expanded gun rights. However, the court still has another firearm case on its docket for the fall, which involves the Biden administration's appeal over the regulation of ghost guns that are difficult to trace.

The justices have postponed addressing questions concerning other state and federal gun restrictions that have emerged in the aftermath of the 2022 Bruen ruling. Under this ruling, gun laws must have a foundation in historic tradition to remain valid. Justice Samuel Alito expressed disagreement with the court's decision not to hear the challenge to the Illinois assault weapons ban, while Justice Clarence Thomas referred to the law as "highly suspect" and expressed his hope to address the case later on.

The Illinois assault weapons ban was put into effect following a tragic mass shooting that occurred during the Independence Day parade in the suburbs of Chicago in 2022, resulting in the loss of seven lives. Currently, ten states and the District of Columbia have bans on semiautomatic guns commonly referred to as assault weapons, according to the gun control group Brady.

Additionally, the Supreme Court has referred another gun case back to lower courts for reconsideration after its June decision in a domestic violence-related gun case. This case challenges the law under which Hunter Biden was convicted. Hunter Biden's defense attorneys have cited the Supreme Court's ruling as they contest the charges against him for purchasing a firearm during a time when he was struggling with addiction.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court has also sent several cases back to lower courts which challenge a law barring individuals from owning guns after being convicted of crimes. One such case involves Bryan Range, a Pennsylvania man who was convicted in 1995 of misstating his income to obtain food stamps for his family. An appeals court has deemed that a lifetime gun ban infringes on his Second Amendment rights.

Another case sent back to lower courts challenges a gun law in New York. Interestingly, this is the same state that was involved in the Supreme Court's Bruen ruling. In response to their strict concealed carry law being overturned by the court, New York implemented new measures that allowed for more individuals to obtain gun licenses but imposed restrictions on carrying weapons in certain locations such as playgrounds, schools, theaters, places that serve alcohol, and buses. While an appeals court has blocked certain aspects of the law, it upheld the state's ability to ban firearms in specific "sensitive" locations and to deny gun licenses to individuals deemed dangerous.

With the Supreme Court sidestepping these Second Amendment fights, the lower courts are now tasked with reevaluating and reaching final judgments on these gun cases. These decisions could have significant implications for gun rights and gun control measures across the country. The issue of balancing public safety concerns with individuals' constitutional right to bear arms remains at the forefront of the ongoing debate surrounding gun regulations.