Supreme Court considers whether to uphold law that keeps guns out of the hands of domestic abusers
The case, U.S. v. Rahimi, comes in the wake of revolutionary changes in doctrine over the past two court terms.
- The case, U.S. v. Rahimi, comes in the wake of revolutionary changes in doctrine over the past two court terms.
- The new supermajority of six conservative justices rapidly introduced new doctrines across a range of controversies, including abortion, guns, religion and race.
- In a revolutionary period, aggressive litigants will push the boundaries of the new doctrine, attempting to stretch it to their advantage.
- After a period of uncertainty, a case that defines the limits on the new rule is likely to emerge.
Focus on guns
- Zackey Rahimi is a convicted drug dealer and violent criminal who also had a restraining order in place after assaulting his girlfriend.
- The court will decide whether the federal law prohibiting the possession of firearms by someone subject to a domestic violence restraining order violates the Second Amendment.
- In the 2022 case of New York Rifle & Pistol v. Bruen, the court announced a new understanding of the Second Amendment.
- If the right to carry a gun can be regulated but not eradicated, limited but not eliminated, where is the line?
- The Rahimi case will provide a critical test of this historical approach to the boundaries of constitutional rights.
- However, those dangers did not include domestic violence, which was not deemed the same important concern then that it is now.
- This story incorporates sections of a previous story about the Supreme Court published on Sept. 26, 2023.
Morgan Marietta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.