Supreme Court declines to take up petition for review on disciplinary actions against Mark and Patricia McCloskey

Mark and Patricia McCloskey of St. Louis, Missouri, gained both fame and notoriety in 2020 when the married couple brandished firearms in defense of their property in a gated neighborhood in response to an unruly and threatening mob of Black Lives Matter protesters that marched down their private street.

The McCloskeys have since faced partisan political punishment and disciplinary action for what they did, and now the Supreme Court has rejected their petition to have the disciplinary measures reviewed and overturned as unconstitutional, the Conservative Brief reported.

McCloskey sought Supreme Court review of state-level discipline

The couple had initially faced felony prosecution but eventually pleaded guilty to minor misdemeanors and were ultimately pardoned in full by Missouri Gov. Michael Parson (R).

Unfortunately, a state office investigating allegations of misconduct against the pair of attorneys recommended that their law licenses be suspended indefinitely.

That recommendation had been challenged by McCloskey but the Missouri State Supreme Court had agreed with the recommended suspension, though that decision was stayed on the condition that the McCloskeys successfully completed a one-year probation and community service.

According to CNN, McCloskey had filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court to have the Missouri court’s decision reviewed, as McCloskey believed that the actions he and his wife took were lawful and protected by the Second Amendment and did not warrant any disciplinary action from the state office.

High court declines to take up case

The hope for a Supreme Court intervention on behalf of the McCloskeys was dashed Monday when the court issued an eight-page Order List that included the McCloskey petition among those for which certiorari was denied, meaning the court would not take up the case.

There were no explanations of why the petition had been denied or any published dissents against that decision, which led CNN to suggest that it was quite likely a unanimous decision among all nine justices to not take up the requested review.

McCloskey, meanwhile, has attempted to benefit from his notoriety with a campaign to run for the Republican nomination to fill the Missouri Senate seat that will soon be vacated by retiring Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) and has highlighted his clear and unwavering support for the Second Amendment-protected right to keep and bear arms as a key plank of his candidacy.

He is not considered a frontrunner in that race, though, but that could potentially change in light of this recent development in his bid to fight back against biased punishment for what he believes was a lawful exercise of his fundamental rights.

Chilling message sent and received

The McCloskeys never did anything wrong or unlawful when they confronted a raucous group of threatening protesters who had broken into their gated community but were nonetheless targeted vindictively by partisan actors in Missouri’s state government.

Unfortunately, given the lack of action by the Supreme Court, it looks like the politicized punishments against them — which are obviously intended to serve as a chilling warning against others who dare to exercise their Second Amendment-protected rights — will stand.

Latest News