No. 25-5535
Jason Daniel Carbajal v. United States
Tags: constitutional-challenge criminal-conviction due-process firearms-regulation second-amendment statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
SecondAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
SecondAmendment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2026-01-16
(distributed 4 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does § 922(g)(1) violate the Second Amendment facially or as applied to individuals with non-violent prior convictions?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
are: 1. Does § 922(g)(1) violate the Second Amendment facially? 2. Does § 922(g)(1) violate the Second Amendment as applied to individuals with convictions for offenses that did not involve the misuse of firearms or establish a credible threat of such misuse?
Docket Entries
2026-01-20
Petition DENIED.
2026-01-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/16/2026.
2026-01-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/9/2026.
2025-12-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/12/2025.
2025-11-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/5/2025.
2025-11-14
Reply of Jason Daniel Carbajal submitted.
2025-11-14
Reply of petitioner Jason Daniel Carbajal filed.
2025-11-03
Memorandum for the United States in Opposition of United States submitted.
2025-11-03
Memorandum of respondent United States filed.
2025-09-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 3, 2025.
2025-09-26
Motion of United States for an extension of time submitted.
2025-09-26
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 3, 2025 to November 3, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
2025-08-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 3, 2025)
Attorneys
Jason Daniel Carbajal
Kristin Michelle Kimmelman — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
Kristin Michelle Kimmelman — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Respondent
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Respondent