Supreme Court Guns
(AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
Previous Post
Next Post

The Supreme Court is going to take another bite at the Second Amendment apple. Earlier this year, a Fifth Circuit panel ruled that banning gun ownership by those who are subject to domestic violence restraining orders is unconstitutional. An en banc hearing of the case was denied and Biden’s DOJ appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court. Today, on the last day of its session, the Court granted cert and will hear the case next term.

Zachary Rahimi was found to be in possession of firearms while under a domestic violence restraining order. He’d been a suspect in a number of crimes including at least five involving firearms. The challenge filed (Rahimi v. US) to the ownership ban in the Fifth Circuit, however, was separate from those charges, which hadn’t yet been tried.

As the court wrote at the time, its prior practice of interest balancing was no longer valid under Bruen . . .

…we previously concluded that the societal benefits of § 922(g)(8) outweighed its burden on Rahimi’s Second Amendment rights. But Bruen forecloses any such analysis in favor of a historical analogical inquiry into the scope of the allowable burden on the Second Amendment right. Through that lens, we conclude that § 922(g)(8)’s ban on possession of firearms is an “outlier[] that our ancestors would never have accepted.” Id. Therefore, the statute is unconstitutional, and Rahimi’s conviction under that statute must be vacated. 

As Judge Stephen Ho wrote . . .

Our court today dutifully follows the framework recently set forth in N.Y. State Rifle. It recognizes the absence of relevant historical analogues required to support the Government’s position in this case. I am pleased to concur.

This one will be very interesting to follow. The Justices to watch on this one will be Kavanaugh and Roberts. Stay tuned.

Previous Post
Next Post

37 COMMENTS

  1. The law is pretty clear: since the accused was also dealing drugs and is therefore not permitted to possess firearms. Am I missing something here?

    • Yes. He had not yet been tried and convicted of any other crimes, and thus far he is not challenging any of thenother prohibitions.

      The only thing prohibiting him at the time was the DVRO. Which is clearly unconstitutional.

      • Be even more interesting if nonviolent drug dealing gets struck down as a prohibition. And while I am not all for drug dealers owning firearms I do not see much point in lifelong prohibition when they will carry anyway while doing it with near impunity and have no legal recourse if they later reform.

        • Is the manufacturer, importer, transporter, retailer of fentynal a “nonviolent” criminal? Pretty clear the moron (or naive fool) that ingest the crap is in danger of death. Or is this suicide? Does death have to result BEFORE it’s a felony for the “supply chain”?

        • “Be even more interesting if nonviolent drug dealing gets struck down as a prohibition.”

          I predict this will be “The crux of the biscuit” (as the late Frank Zappa once noted). – Violence.

          Not proof of violent acts, just the *accusation* of violence, I.E., the dreaded ‘restraining order’.

          As it currently is, just the accusation is all that is needed for issuance of a ‘Red flag Order’, getting your firearms taken from you, by force of law, if necessary.

          I wonder, will this be used to dismantle those damn things?

        • Neiowa are you willing to advise life in prison or execution for dealers? That is about where I draw the line, if we are willing to trust them them to live in society then rights should not be negotiable. After all they can be way more dangerous with a can of gas and matches than with a gun.

  2. I’m good with a domestic violence person not having a firegunm while on probation. After that its bullshit.
    I had a domestic violence charge I was found not guilty luckily.
    To many times someone will fake a DV to punish the person they are pissed at. All you have to do is rip your clothing, call the law and make a false statement. Bam, off to prison American satan and no gunms for you for the rest of your life.
    Bill Clinton’s gunm grab scheme is what it is. Look how much they pushed the DV criteria, it went from true abuse to just a threat of violence is good enough cause to strip you of a constitutional Right.
    No sir, I dont like it.

    • just another way to restrict a group’s gun rights…they just keep nibbling away…

      • “…they just keep nibbling away…”

        Just to be clear- this case in question is actually “nibbling” back.

    • “To many times someone will fake a DV to punish the person they are pissed at.”

      ~and~

      “…it went from true abuse to just a threat of violence is good enough cause to strip you of a constitutional Right.”

      I *hope* this is what got that case granted cert….

      • Another classic press conference from your sheriff. “SWAT shot him a lot- killed him graveyard dead” I know sheriff Nocco must be like “why can’t we get some of those people?”

        • Grady Judd is a true gem, and Polk County *loves* him… 🙂

  3. Ya know some 39 years ago I was accused of dumb estic violence. Never happened. Sometimes gals lie. Sometimes guys lie…have a gat & ammo stash hidden away🙄

    • “Sometimes gals lie.”

      if women never lie about rape, this wouldn’t be an issue…

      • “if women never lie about rape, this wouldn’t be an issue… “

        If men didn’t commit rape and sexual assault this wouldn’t be an issue…

        As it turns out, some men do commit sexual assault, and are dumb enough to admit “I don’t care, I just grab them by the pussy…”.

        And it seems a large percentage of conservatives actually approve of that behavior.

        • MINOR Miner49er, If horses could fly they would not be called horses. For your edification many women have also been convicted of rape. Sorry to bust your bubble.

    • I am conflicted by this one. I think some people who have restraining orders against them probably give the rest of us gun owners a very, very bad name and add to the stats of violent crime with a gun. On the other hand I do know it catches ALOT of innocent people who have not had their day in court and is used as a weapon against many. I don’t want to apply a double standard so I will have to do some reflection on similar issues before coming to my final opinion. I am leaning towards “if they are really a threat to a family member should they really be walking around in society anyways?” The one thing I can say with 1,000,000% certainty is I wish the court would have picked up an assault weapons ban case before this one.

      • “On the other hand I do know it catches ALOT of innocent people who have not had their day in court and is used as a weapon against many.”

        That, right *there*, is the only reason needed to stop that bullshit cold… 🙁

    • This will blow your mind: about half the liars in this world are female!! Actually, I think that Genesis documents that women created lying, but a genuine Bible scholar would have to verify that.

      • “I think that Genesis documents that women created lying“

        Actually, it was Jehovah who first lied:

        Genesis 2:17
        “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

        Both Adam and Eve ate of the tree and did not die on that day, in fact, Adam lived 930 years.

  4. ALL post-release prohibitions are unconstitutional. Even released murders. Either they’re still a threat and shouldn’t be released, or they’re reformed and should be afforded all rights granted by God. There can not be two skies.

  5. ●First, Zachary Rahimi is a POS.
    ●Second, on multiple occasions state courts and prosecutors could have dealt with this problem child effectively which would have curtailed his criminal activities.
    ●Third, the federal government got involved with this because the state level failures which brings us to the current situation which will actually produce a positive outcome.

  6. I do not think even the present far right radical nut case Supreme Court will go this far because if it does it condemns thousands of women to death every year.

    • “…because if it does it condemns thousands of women to death every year.”

      A line from Mario Puzo’s ‘The Godfather’ comes to mind –

      The Don’s daughter comes to him crying that her husband beats her.

      The Don looks her in the eye and asks her “What have you done to cause him to hit you?” 🙂

      • “The Don looks her in the eye and asks her “What have you done to cause him to hit you?”

        And there you have it, the Conservatives will openly quote a Sicilian mobster as justification for their position.

        Just like the ‘moms for Liberty’ quoting Adolf Hitler in their newsletter, when someone tells you who they are, believe them.

        • Ah…… that was a character in a movie and you’re the guy who told us that Hillary could declassify classified documents merely by removing the classification markings. You have no credibility here.

        • So you are a civil rights denying anti American. We believe you. The only difference between you and hitler is that race doesn’t enter into your perfidy.

    • “I do not think even the present far right radical nut case Supreme Court will go this far…”

      Freedom is messy. People get hurt and die. That’s far better than living in a nanny state that tells you what to do over every piss-ant issue.

      Someone said once that dangerous liberty is far better that peaceful slavery…

    • The lady in NJ died waiting for a permit to purchase a pistol. Her abusive husband stabbed her to death. A right delayed is a right denied.

  7. With all the people screwed over for what most of time is a peeing contest between two lovebirds it seems they could’ve come up with someone with less baggage than Zachary Rahimi. Hopefully the court can cut through the muck and see how nazi it is to deny a right for life.

    Furthermore…Until the Historical Analogies surrounding Gun Control and its rot are factored in Historical Analogies are a one side, lopside Second Amendment litmus test.

  8. It’s almost routine for divorce lawyers to accuse fathers of domestic violence in Australia.

    You loose your firearms, job in many cases and sometimes have your bank accounts frozen.

    The really sleazy ones add child abuse.

    Friends gun shop had so many firearms in storage waiting for court cases they had to hire secure warehouse space.

    All this on unproven allegations.

Comments are closed.