A criminal case against YoungBoy Never Broke Again over federal gun charges must be put on hold until the U.S. Supreme Court decides a closely-watched Second Amendment battle this spring, a federal judge says - likely delaying a trial that had been scheduled to start in July.

In an order Wednesday (Mar. 13), U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick said she would wait to proceed until after the justices had issued their gun-control ruling since the Supreme Court's looming decision will likely touch on the same Second Amendment questions at play in NBA YoungBoy's case.

YoungBoy's lawyers say the law he's accused of breaking - a ban on convicted felons possessing firearms - is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, which protects the right to "keep and bear arms." The pending Supreme Court case, meanwhile, will decide the constitutionality of a similar federal ban on gun ownership for domestic abusers.
After years of house arrest, YoungBoy (Kentrell DeSean Gaulden) had finally been set for a trial in July. Wednesday's order will likely delay that trial since it could be June before the high court even rules on the pending case. But the delay might be worth it: If the Supreme Court rules against the gun restrictions in that case, it could greatly help YoungBoy beat his charges altogether.

The rapper's attorney did not immediately return a request for comment.

YoungBoy was indicted by federal prosecutors in March 2021 after he was allegedly found with two guns during a September 2020 incident in Baton Rouge, La. He was charged with violating a long-standing federal law that bans convicted felons from ever again possessing guns - a rule that applied to him because he was convicted in 2017 of aggravated assault with a firearm.

In a motion filed last month, attorneys for the rapper argued that the charges against YoungBoy must be dismissed without trial because that federal ban violates the Second Amendment. They cited a landmark gun control ruling issued by the high court in 2022, which struck down a New York state law that had placed strict limits on carrying guns outside the home.

Echoing the language of that ruling, YoungBoy's lawyers said the federal felon-in-possession statute was similarly unconstitutional because it was "inconsistent with our nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation."

"This prosecution seeks to restrict and deny Mr. Gaulden's Second Amendment right to possess a firearm based solely on his status a felon and his alleged failure to comply with bureaucratic regulations," the star's attorneys told the judge.

In a response this month, federal prosecutors sharply disagreed, arguing that the gun ban for convicts had already been upheld in "hundreds of cases" since the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling. They acknowledged that a few judges had ruled otherwise, but that the "overwhelming majority of courts" had continued to enforce the law.

In Wednesday's order, Judge Dick said she could not decide those arguments until the Supreme Court rules on United States v. Rahimi, the pending case challenging a federal law that prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic violence restraining orders. The case, argued last fall, is expected to be decided by June.

It's difficult to predict how the Supreme Court might rule on a given case, but the tea leaves don't look good for YoungBoy's position. After arguments in the Rahimi case in November, Reuters reported that the court "appeared inclined to uphold the legality" of the domestic violence gun restrictions, with several justices suggesting the Second Amendment wouldn't stop the government from banning "dangerous" people from owning guns.

Whenever the Supreme Court rules on the Rahimi case, YoungBoy and federal prosecutors will have 14 days to file briefs on how the case should proceed

Originally Posted By JeepersCreepers:


He was charged with violating a long-standing federal law that bans convicted felons from ever again possessing guns - a rule that applied to him because he was convicted in 2017 of aggravated assault with a firearm.

Good.  Fuck NBA YoungBoy.  Shoot at people who don't need to be shot at and you shouldn't be allowed to legally possess a gun ever again.

Originally Posted By JeepersCreepers:


He was charged with violating a long-standing federal law that bans convicted felons from ever again possessing guns - a rule that applied to him because he was convicted in 2017 of aggravated assault with a firearm.

Good.  Fuck NBA YoungBoy.  Shoot at people who don't need to be shot at and you shouldn't be allowed to legally possess a gun ever again.

Originally Posted By Kuraki:
I had to read half the article to realize it was a case against a person, and not an organization named by a Chinese marketing agent for duplicate Amazon products.

Originally Posted By TheAmaazingCarl:
I kinda agree with the defendant.

If someone does their time and are released they should have all their rights back.   If they are still provably a danger to society they shouldn't be released. Allowed to exist.


The reason it doesn't work that way is we incarcerate far too many people for victimless "crimes" which is not just immoral but a ridiculous waste of tax dollars that destroys families and further degrades society as a whole.  Society is circling the drain and idiots are screaming they need just a little more water to make it better.

Originally Posted By RevDeadCorpse:
Creating a permanent disability gives little incentive to "straighten up and fly right" afterwards. Remaining a second class citizen is also problematic.

For every dirtbag rapper with a violence problem... how many Martha Stewarts, Wesley Snipes, and hell... even some of the J6 folks who were non-violent currently in jail on felony political persecutions, are there?

None of the Federal laws on the books pass even an abstract Constitutional "smell" test. The only reason the NFA, and later the GCA and FOPA that modified it and created new infringements, is still in place is because it gave government a LOT of power it isn't supposed to have in the first place.

Shall... not... be... infringed.

Originally Posted By JeepersCreepers:


He was charged with violating a long-standing federal law that bans convicted felons from ever again possessing guns - a rule that applied to him because he was convicted in 2017 of aggravated assault with a firearm.

Good.  Fuck NBA YoungBoy.  Shoot at people who don't need to be shot at and you shouldn't be allowed to legally possess a gun ever again.

Originally Posted By JeepersCreepers:

 Shoot at people who don't need to be shot at and you shouldn't be allowed to legally possess a gun ever again.

Originally Posted By TheAmaazingCarl:
I kinda agree with the defendant.

If someone does their time and are released they should have all their rights back.   If they are still provably a danger to society they shouldn't be released.


The reason it doesn't work that way is we incarcerate far too many people for victimless "crimes" which is not just immoral but a ridiculous waste of tax dollars that destroys families and further degrades society as a whole.  Society is circling the drain and idiots are screaming they need just a little more water to make it better.

Originally Posted By UV18:



He shot at someone before. Not a "victimless" crime.

But you want rights restored, right? The child molester was just released and wants a job at the local school. He should be hired, right? We need to end sex offense registration, since they served their time too.

Originally Posted By NotJackMiller:

Fuck the law and fuck that criminal.  He should still be in prison.  If you're too dangerous to have a gun, you're too dangerous to be on the streets.

Originally Posted By RevDeadCorpse:
Convicted child molesters should be executed.

But... your strawman is noted.

Now... about catching a felony for free speech and having your 2A rights infringed... Because THAT has actually happened.

Originally Posted By Kuraki:
I had to read half the article to realize it was a case against a person, and not an organization named by a Chinese marketing agent for duplicate Amazon products.

Originally Posted By UV18:



He shot at someone before. Not a "victimless" crime.

But you want rights restored, right? The child molester was just released and wants a job at the local school. He should be hired, right? We need to end sex offense registration, since they served their time too.

Originally Posted By UV18:



Both are convicted of crimes that have additional consequences away from the serving of the sentence. You either support their rights being restored or you do not. No strawman but a 100% valid consequence of what you support.

Originally Posted By TW52:


This, 100%!

Not sure how people on a gun forum don't get it.

"The average person (unknowingly) commits 3 felonies a day".

Originally Posted By RevDeadCorpse:
It's literally the definition of a strawman argument. Conflating a felony for a crime where the law is the only "victim" with a felony that has a clear victim is about as far apart as you can get...

Originally Posted By fsjdw2:



I’d wager there is a “historic tradition” of shallow graves and “boating accidents ” for those people.  Unlikely a written historic tradition,  but tradition just the same. Example “Ken McElroy” shot to death by a .22lr AND a center fire rifle in front of 46 witnesses and nobody saw a thing.  Towns folk were quoted as saying “needed killing”. Lol

Originally Posted By JBecker_72:
I don't see how that's remotely true. Simple petty misdemeanors, maybe. Felonies though? lol, no. Not the average person anyway.

Originally Posted By Paul:
Tried to kill someone and four years later he's not only out but carrying a gun again.

Originally Posted By Stokes:
I think some of you guys that believe in only one form of punishment haven't really thought it thru.

Originally Posted By TheAmaazingCarl:
I kinda agree with the defendant.

If someone does their time and are released they should have all their rights back.   If they are still provably a danger to society they shouldn't be released.


The reason it doesn't work that way is we incarcerate far too many people for victimless "crimes" which is not just immoral but a ridiculous waste of tax dollars that destroys families and further degrades society as a whole.  Society is circling the drain and idiots are screaming they need just a little more water to make it better.

Originally Posted By LeadBreakfast:

That's about the only thing that the ghetto does correctly - there are a lot of blind people there. Modern America is so full of Karens that the most heinous, sick criminals could be fixed quickly and permanently for $0.25 and someone would have squads rolling yesterday to come hem up the problem solvers.