November 7, 2023
Do people with domestic violence restraining orders have a constitutional right to possess a gun.
That was the question in front of the Supreme Court today and marks one of two major gun rights cases the court is hearing this term. And they did seem to signal what their ruling may be. Before I tell you what it is – let me just refresh your memory about United States vs Rahimi.
I’ve actually told you about this case in several videos. Rahimi is Zackey Rahimi a convicted drug dealer 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 was involved in multiple shootings in Texas. He was indicted by a federal grand jury for possession of a firearm 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.
The Fifth Circuit said – because of a landmark Supreme Court ruling last year that established the Bruen test – Texas’s state law banning people with domestic violence restraining orders from possessing guns is unconstitutional becuase it’s not “consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
Well – today – during oral arguments – the Supreme Court justices seemed to side with the government on this one. Indicating that the second amendment does not prevent legislatures – both state and federal from restricting firearm possession after some sort of court finding that a person is dangerous. But on the flip side the justices also suggested that the government’s argument that only “law abiding, responsible citizens” were protected under the second amendment is not right either.
As I always say – just because this is how the justices seemed to lean during oral argument doesn’t mean that’s how they’ll rule in the end. A final ruling is scheduled in United States vs Rahimi at the end of the term in June.
