By In a pivotal decision, the Supreme Court upheld a federal gun control law designed to safeguard victims of domestic violence. The ruling, a significant development in Second Amendment jurisprudence since the 2022 expansion of gun rights, came in an 8-1 decision favoring a 1994 ban on firearms for individuals under restraining orders issued to protect spouses or partners. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, marking a notable contrast to his previous Second Amendment stance.
The case, stemming from the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision in June 2022, centered on Zackey Rahimi, a Texas man accused of domestic violence. Rahimi’s appeal challenged his conviction for possessing firearms while under a restraining order. This appeal had broader implications, as it could potentially impact the enforcement of other gun ownership laws, including those relevant to high-profile cases such as Hunter Biden’s recent conviction related to firearm acquisition.
The Supreme Court’s decision is seen as critical not only for affirming the constitutionality of the domestic violence gun law but also for its potential influence on future Second Amendment cases. The ruling underscores the judiciary’s evolving approach to evaluating firearm restrictions post-Bruen, which both expanded gun rights and introduced a new framework for assessing gun control measures.
Advocates supporting the upheld law emphasized its role in protecting vulnerable populations, citing alarming statistics from the CDC showing firearms as the primary weapon in over 57% of domestic homicides. Groups like Everytown for Gun Safety underscored the urgency of maintaining such protective measures amidst rising rates of domestic violence, exacerbated during the pandemic.
The Supreme Court’s decision is expected to shape ongoing debates surrounding gun control and constitutional rights, highlighting the delicate balance between public safety and individual liberties in the context of domestic violence prevention.
