Louisville judge acknowledges 'inconsistent' rulings on whether felons have right to own guns

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WDRB) – A Louisville judge who ruled in March that a convicted felon can't be prosecuted for owning a gun because it violates his Second Amendment rights has issued an opposite order in a similar case.

Jefferson Circuit Court Judge Melissa Logan Bellows previously found it unconstitutional for prosecutors to move forward with their case against Jecory Lamont Frazier under a state law prohibiting felons from owning a gun because it doesn’t outweigh the Second Amendment right that belongs to “all Americans.”

But on Wednesday, Bellows ruled the opposite way in the case of Matthew Stewart, who faced the same charge, acknowledging the inconsistency in the orders, saying it was "intentional."

"That the rulings … are inconsistent is both obvious and intentional," Bellows wrote. "Interpreting and applying legal precedent is an inexact science at best. … This is never more true than when the legal issue presented implicates a cherished Constitutional right."

The judge said she intended her ruling in the Frazier case to "be a means to the end of obtaining a binding precedent as soon as practicable." In essence, the judge is waiting for a higher court to weigh in on the issue.

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the issue in an out-of-state case. It is unclear when the high court will rule.

Bellows has previously said that her ruling only affects the Frazier case.

"It is the Court’s hope and intention that this will provide the clarity necessary to ensure consistency among the judges confronting this issue and, as such, will ultimately and more expeditiously inure to the benefit of both the Commonwealth and the individuals before the judge charged," Bellows ruled this week.

Attorney General Russell Coleman and Jefferson Commonwealth's Attorney Gerina Whethers have already asked the state Court of Appeals to review the Frazier ruling.

"Violent crime and deadly drugs are Louisville's most urgent challenges," Coleman said in May. "We are appealing this order because it defies good common sense and would give even the most violent felon a broad right to possess deadly weapons. The most ardent supporters of the Second Amendment – me included – recognize the constitutionality of laws prohibiting the possession of firearms by felons like the defendant here."

The prosecution has argued before Bellows that the U.S. justice system has consistently disarmed people "who it deems to be unvirtuous, such as felons" and that the Kentucky Supreme Court has supported this argument.

But Bellows, who was elected in 2022, cited a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that there is a "strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans."

In the ruling on Wednesday, Bellows referenced the same case but "acknowledged that it remained possible for the government to place reasonable limitations on those rights. The type of arms than an individual has a right to keep and bear, for example, could properly be limited to those that are in common use for self-defense."

This story will be updated.