AP Photo/Lisa Marie Pane

When Judge Bret Kavanaugh was confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice, there was hope that gun cases would appear before the court with increased regularity. Admittedly, many felt the same way after Judge Neal Gorsuch was confirmed.

So far, we have gotten at least one gun case set for a date with the Supreme Court. That’s great. Others, not so much.

For example, the Supreme Court just rejected one challenge that would have had it determine the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act.

The Supreme Court rejected a challenge to federal regulation of gun silencers Monday, just days after a gunman used one in a shooting rampage that killed 12 people in Virginia.

The justices did not comment in turning away appeals from two Kansas men who were convicted of violating federal law regulating silencers. The men argued that the constitutional right “to keep and bear arms” includes silencers.

In the silencer cases, Kansas and seven other states joined in a court filing urging justices to hear the appeals. The states said the court should affirm that the Second Amendment protects “silencers and other firearms accessories.” The other states are: Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Montana, South Carolina, Texas and Utah.

President Trump’s administration asked the court to stay out of the case and leave the convictions in place.

It’s too bad that the Court decided not to hear the case. I’ve always felt that there’s no way machine guns or suppressors should be so tightly regulated, especially due to the militia clause of the Second Amendment. The Founding Fathers made it clear that they wanted the people to be armed in such a way as to repel an invasion or even to overthrow a tyrannical ruler. In this day and age, that calls for things like suppressors and select-fire weapons which are considered machine guns under the National Firearms Act.

Had the Court heard the case, I doubt it’d interpret it quite as liberally as I do, but a guy can dream.

As things stand, the Court will do nothing. The law will stand, and we now have to fend off an attack on suppressors–among the most tightly controlled devices available for a firearm. Nevermind the hundreds of thousands of them that have been used responsibly and lawfully for years. Nope, anti-gunners want to ban the damn things anyway.

A Supreme Court ruling that found suppressors and machine guns covered under the Second Amendment, however, would have shortcircuited the arguments, thus protecting suppressors not just from today’s lawmakers to at least some degree, but also future legislators who would infringe on our sacred and protected right to keep and bear arms.

Unfortunately, that’s not going to happen. Instead, we’ll be stuck with this unjust and unconstitutional infringement on our liberties and our means of defending our homes from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Worse, we’ll still be trying to keep our AR-15s and similar rifles instead of rejoicing that we get full-auto capable guns without jumping through the NFA hoops.