In a big win for gun control advocates, the Supreme Court on Friday upheld a federal law that bans domestic abuse offenders from possessing a firearm. The vote was 8-1, with Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting.
This case stemmed from a Texas man, Zackey Rahimi, who has a history of domestic abuse and violated an order of protection against him when he had a gun in his possession and tried to use it against his partner. A lower court said Rahimi could have a firearm, but the majority of justices disagreed and said Rahimi cannot possess a gun as a domestic violence offender.
Read the Supreme Court ruling here:
This embedded content is not available in your region.
🧑⚖️ What the justices said
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the opinion.
“When a restraining order contains a finding that an individual poses a credible threat to the physical safety of an intimate partner, that individual may — consistent with the Second Amendment — be banned from possessing firearms while the order is in effect,” Roberts wrote. “Since the founding, our nation’s firearm laws have included provisions preventing individuals who threaten physical harm to others from misusing firearms.”
The case tested the limits of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc. v. Bruen, which expanded gun rights. That ruling said that proposed gun laws have to be “consistent” with the historical tradition of firearm regulation, requiring the government to provide examples of obscure or defunct regulations.
Roberts addressed that decision in Friday’s ruling and wrote: “Some courts have misunderstood the methodology of our recent Second Amendment cases. These precedents were not meant to suggest a law trapped in amber.”
⬅️ How we got here
At the heart of the United States v. Rahimi case was what kind of restrictions the government could place on an individual’s rights to bear arms. Rahimi was charged with violating criminal law for having a firearm in his possession and trying to also use that firearm against his partner.
Rahimi appealed that decision to the Fifth Circuit Court. The court said that based on the Bruen decision (New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, decided in 2022), the Fifth Circuit ruled that Rahimi could have his gun and that prohibiting people with an order of protection against them was outside of what the government could do based on the Bruen decision.
That was appealed by the Biden administration, which is how it ended up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
This is a breaking news story. Please refresh this page for updates.
Signup bonus from
