2nd Amendment does not protect illegal alien who allegedly lied on gun form, judge rules
An illegal alien who has lived in the U.S. for nearly two decades is not protected under the Second Amendment, a federal judge has ruled.
Carlos Serrano-Restrepo is a foreign national who currently resides in Orient, Ohio, about an hour east of Springfield, having last crossed the border to enter the U.S. in April 2008. Since then, he has bought a home and opened a business that helps remediate fire and flood damage, according to WSYX.
He previously lived in Arizona but moved to Ohio in 2022, under the Biden-Harris administration, and filed an asylum claim, fully 14 years after his arrival in the U.S. That claim remains pending.
In 2023, the Biden-Harris Department of Homeland Security approved Serrano-Restrepo’s application to work legally in the U.S., at least until March 2025, and the Social Security Administration approved his application for a Social Security number.
‘The swearing of an oath of allegiance occurs through the naturalization process, not through his asylum application or his years of living in the United States.’
Around this time, Serrano-Restrepo also managed to amass a significant assortment of firearms, some of which were reportedly purchased for self-defense. During these purchases, he allegedly stated on ATF Form 4473 “that he had citizenship in the United States and that he was neither unlawfully in the United States, nor admitted under a nonimmigrant visa,” court documents said.
After obtaining an Ohio driver’s license, Serrano-Restrepo once again filled out the form, allegedly claiming he had dual citizenship in the U.S. and Colombia and that he “was not unlawfully in the United States or admitted under a nonimmigrant visa.”
The purchase of at least 22 firearms and the apparent lies about citizenship on the forms caught the attention of the ATF, which began investigating him.
Last January, ATF agents seized approximately 170 weapons, many of which were displayed in gun safes and closets, and thousands of rounds of ammunition from his residence. In July, a grand jury indicted Serrano-Restrepo for possession of a firearm by an alien unlawfully in the U.S.
His attorney then filed a motion to dismiss the charges, arguing that even though Serrano-Restrepo is in the country illegally, he is protected under the Second Amendment since he “has been part of the national community and developed sufficient connections with the United States to be considered part of its community.”
On Thursday, Judge Edmund A. Sargus Jr. of the Eastern Division of the Southern District of Ohio denied that motion to dismiss. Citing the 2022 Bruen decision of the Supreme Court, which severely restricts when the government can regulate gun ownership in America, Sargus claimed that the U.S. has a history of preventing groups of “outsiders” deemed to be national security threats from arming themselves.
“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,” Sargus wrote. “These outsiders were disarmed because they were perceived as dangerous to public safety or social stability, and thus not trusted to possess firearms.”
In the same way, the U.S. government is within its rights to restrict Serrano-Restrepo, an illegal alien outsider who has never sworn a formal oath of allegiance to America, from bearing arms, Sargus ruled.
“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,” Sargus continued. “Mr. Serrano-Restrepo’s as-applied challenge lacks merit. The swearing of an oath of allegiance occurs through the naturalization process, not through his asylum application or his years of living in the United States.”
Serrano-Restrepo’s trial is scheduled to begin January 21, 2025.
Steve Nolder, an attorney representing Serrano-Restrepo, told Blaze News that his client “did not pose any danger” with his weapons collection and that he is “very disappointed” with Judge Sargus’ decision.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
