In a recent decision, the Supreme Court upheld a federal law prohibiting individuals under domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms. The 8-1 ruling, delivered on June 21, 2024, affirms the government’s authority to disarm individuals deemed a credible threat to the physical safety of others. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, stated that such measures are consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that the decision lacks historical precedent. (cnn.com)
The case, United States v. Rahimi, centered on Zackey Rahimi, who was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8) for possessing firearms while subject to a domestic violence restraining order. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had previously vacated Rahimi’s conviction, finding the statute unconstitutional. The Supreme Court’s reversal reinstates the law’s enforcement, emphasizing the government’s role in preventing firearm misuse by individuals posing a threat to others. (en.wikipedia.org)
This ruling follows the Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which expanded Second Amendment rights by recognizing the right to carry firearms in public for self-defense. The Rahimi decision clarifies that while the Second Amendment protects individual rights, it does not preclude regulations disarming individuals who pose a credible threat to others. (en.wikipedia.org)
The Court’s decision underscores the balance between individual rights and public safety, acknowledging that certain restrictions are permissible when individuals are found to be dangerous. This approach aligns with historical firearm regulations aimed at preventing harm while respecting constitutional rights. (cnn.com)
In summary, the Supreme Court’s ruling in United States v. Rahimi upholds the federal prohibition on firearm possession for individuals under domestic violence restraining orders, reinforcing the government’s authority to implement measures that protect public safety within the framework of the Second Amendment.
—
Mark Davis writes on constitutional rights, firearms legislation, and state-level legal trends. A graduate of Liberty University with a background in legal research, he has reported on gun rights cases from state courts to the Supreme Court. Before journalism, he worked with a constitutional law nonprofit focused on Second Amendment litigation.