July 8, 2023
Does someone with a court-approved domestic violence restraining order have a 2nd Amendment right to possess guns?
It’s a controversial question that the Supreme Court just announced it would be answering during its next term. But that’s not the only case the justices agreed to hear. They are also taking up a controversial tax case that could give billions of tax dollars back to big corporations and could change Congress’s taxing powers….which I told you about in the video right after this one.
But first – let’s talk about this gun case. The case is called United States vs Rahimi. Rahimi is Zackey Rahimi from Texas who had a court-ordered restraining order against him for allegedly assaulting his girlfriend. Both federal and Texas state law bans people with domestic violence restraining orders from possessing guns. Well after that restraining order was imposed Rahimi according to court documents was involved in multiple shootings in Texas. He was indicted by a federal grand jury for possession of a fire arm while under a domestic violence restraining order. But he sued saying that federal law that restricts him from having guns violates his second amendment right. And the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with him.
You may be wondering how did the appeals court make that decision? Because of a landmark Supreme Court ruling last year in the New York state rifle and Pistol Association vs Bruen case. The Supreme Court ruled it is constitutional to carry guns in public and the court’s conservative majority established a new test for when a gun law is constitutional — called the Bruen test. It says – modern day laws must be “consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” Basically, the test says — in order for any modern-day gun laws to be constitutional – those laws must have ties to gun laws from America’s founding. They don’t have to be twins but they have to have some traditional roots. But that Bruen test has caused all kinds of questions and confusion in the lower courts. Because of course we know domestic violence laws weren’t a thing in 1776, neither were drug laws and it goes without saying high capacity firearms weren’t even in existence back then. So this Rahimi case will give the Supreme Court its first chance to clarify how the Bruen test will work and how closely current gun restrictions must mirror those that existed during the founding of America.
Read the docket in United States vs Rahimi here.
