June 16, 2014: Earlier today, a divided Supreme Court (5-4) ruled that the federal ban on straw purchases can be enforced even when the actual intended purchaser is legally permitted to purchase and own a firearm. The case, Abramski v. United States, involved a former Virginia police officer (Bruce Abramski) who purchased a firearm for his uncle without informing the FFL retailer that he was not the ultimate purchaser of the firearm. Mr. Abramski was convicted for knowingly making false statements “with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale” of a firearm, in violation of §922(a)(6) and for making a false statement “with respect to the information required…to be kept” in a firearm dealer’s records, in violation of §924(a)(1)(A). In upholding Mr. Abramski’s conviction, Justice Kagan (writing for the majority) stated that “no piece of information is more important under federal firearms law than the identity of a gun’s purchaser – the person who acquires a gun as a result of a transaction with a licensed dealer.” In dissent, Justice Scalia reasoned that the language of the law does not support making it a crime for one lawful firearm owner to buy a firearm for another lawful firearm owner. The Supreme Court’s full opinion can be found here.