The Supreme Court has upset a lot of Second Amendment advocates, and for understandable reasons. After a long, drawn-out fight to get conservative, pro-gun justices appointed, we kind of expected a little something to show for the effort.

Instead, the Court has blown off every since Second Amendment case that’s been presented to them

However, the Second Amendment Foundation’s Alan Gottlieb is still hopeful the Court will hear at least one gun case.

when they turned down 10 Second Amendment-related cases. The last time the Court heard a gun-related case was in 2010 with the landmark McDonald v. Chicago decision. Although the decision felt like a blow, Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President, Alan Gottlieb, said there is still hope.

“The Second Amendment Foundation still has one case pending Cert before the Supreme Court. I think there is a very good chance that they will hear this one,” Gottlieb told Townhall.

The Court has yet to decide whether or not they will hear Lori Rodriguez, et al. vs. City of San Jose, which Gottlieb said has Second Amendment and Fourth Amendment implications.

Rodriguez is legally qualified to own firearms in the State of California. Her firearms, however, were confiscated seven years ago after her husband was hospitalized for mental health issues. A San Jose police officer told Rodriguez he had the authority to seize all firearms at the premise, even those that belong solely to her. She followed the law requiring her to store her firearms in a California-approved safe. Despite that, the firearms were taken without a warrant and with Rodriguez’s objection.

What happened to Rodriguez is absolve male bovine excrement and we all know it. She’s been unable to get her guns back, including one that was brought back from World War II. As someone with a war souvenir firearm myself–an SKS from Vietnam my father came home with–I have a great deal of sympathy with her plight.

Yet even without that particular weapon, her cause is still just.

Rodriguez apparently has sole access to the safe. Her husband, who had profound mental health issues, didn’t have any way to get to the guns inside. It didn’t matter.

Now, she can’t get them back, even though San Jose authorities argue she’s free to buy new guns all day long.

My thing is, if she can buy new ones, why can’t she have her old ones back?

Regardless, Gottlieb argues that the findings of this case, should the Court hear it, could have ramifications on red flag laws in general. That’s an important point and one we should all pay close attention to. However, that only matters if the Court actually hears the cases in the first place.

My sincere hope is that Rodriguez gets her guns back and that red flag laws are, at a minimum, severely limited so that people don’t lose their guns over the mental status of a third party. That should never happen and the city of San Jose knows damn good and well they’re in the wrong.

Like so many other anti-gun states, though, they just don’t care.