The Supreme Court will not hear a challenge to bans on assault weapons.
From The Washington Post’s coverage:
Gun rights advocates say cities and states continue to put unreasonable restrictions on the constitutional right. But the court has not yet found a case it thinks requires its intervention.
That could be because a majority of the court thinks the restrictions are legally justified or because the court is closely divided and neither side is sure of what the outcome of taking a case might be.
By its inaction, the court has left in place lower court rulings that allow restrictions on carrying a weapon outside the home, among other things, and on the kinds of guns that can be prohibited.
So by doing nothing to prevent states or municipalities from banning assault weapons The Supremes have essentially allowed it — further demonstration of the convenient decision-making process of the judiciary: if you don’t want to get wet, stay out of the pool.