This guest post is from Miranda Neal, Regent Law Family Law student:
In November 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments for the United States v. Rahimi, which is set to decide whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic violence restraining orders, violates the Second Amendment on its face.
The United States argued in brief and at oral arguments that New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which introduced a historical analogous test for Second Amendment restrictions, allowed Congress to take away gun rights from individuals who are not responsible, law-abiding citizens. While members of the court seemed to agree that domestic violence is dangerous, they were unsure of how to determine how a person is not responsible and law-abiding.
Rahimi argued that no strong analogous law in 1791 permitted the government to take away a person’s gun subject to a civil order. Therefore, this statute fails the Bruen test and is unconstitutional. In response to his argument, the Court was skeptical, indicating that it believed there were at least some gun restrictions allowed for dangerous individuals, such as Rahimi.
This case will be the first time the Court has a chance to use the test created by Bruen, which has confused the lower courts. If the Court sides with the United States using the historical analogous test, it could allow the Court to clarify how analogous the law in 1791 must be to allow the modern-day restriction. However, if the Court finds the law unconstitutional, then there will likely be an increase in other gun restriction challenges.
Advocates
for gun rights believe that this law is unconstitutional because those subject
to these temporary domestic violence restraining orders have not been convicted
of a crime. Therefore, their Second Amendment rights should not be taken away.
On the other side, domestic violence safety advocates argue that striking down
this law will lead to an uptick in domestic violence featuring gun violence. According
to the National Coalition Against
Domestic Violence, more than 10 million adults experience domestic violence
annually, and most intimate partner homicides are committed with firearms.
As of now, federal background checks for sales of firearms indicate when an individual is subject to a civil domestic violence restraining order under the challenged statute. However, if the Court rules in favor of Rahimi, the flag would be lifted and wouldn’t prevent a person from purchasing a firearm.
The Supreme Court’s decision is pending and will determine whether more laws regulating gun regulations will be challenged or a massive policy change across the country with domestic violence restraining orders.
No comments:
Post a Comment