The United States Supreme Court has agreed to review the constitutionality of a federal law prohibiting individuals subject to domestic-violence restraining orders from owning firearms. The case was brought before the Supreme Court after the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans ruled in February that the law violated the Second Amendment.

The law in question is Section 922(g)(8) of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, which prohibits the possession of firearms by individuals considered a “credible threat” to an intimate partner or their child, as determined by a judge following notice and a court hearing.

The 5th Circuit evaluated the law using the standard set by the Supreme Court in June 2022 in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. In that ruling, the Supreme Court stated that courts should consider the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation when evaluating gun regulations.

Applying the Bruen approach, the 5th Circuit struck down the federal law, deeming it an “outlier” that our ancestors would not have accepted.

Don’t settle for a mediocre legal job. Search BCG Attorney Search for the best opportunities!

The case before the Supreme Court originated from a civil protective order issued in the matter of Zackey Rahimi, an alleged drug dealer who was accused of assaulting his girlfriend during an argument in Arlington, Texas, in 2019. According to the federal government’s cert petition, Rahimi grabbed his girlfriend by the wrists, knocking her to the ground. He then allegedly forced her into his car, causing her head to strike the dashboard.

Upon realizing that a bystander had witnessed the incident, Rahimi retrieved a firearm and fired a shot. Frightened, the girlfriend managed to escape the scene. In February 2020, a judge issued a restraining order prohibiting Rahimi from possessing firearms. However, in August 2020, Rahimi was arrested for violating the order when he attempted to communicate with his former girlfriend on social media and approached her home at night.

Subsequently, Rahimi faced allegations of threatening another woman with a firearm. He was also accused of participating in five shootings, leading the police to obtain a search warrant for his residence, where they discovered guns and ammunition.

Legal experts on both sides perceive the Supreme Court’s decision to review this case as an opportunity to clarify the parameters established in the Bruen ruling and potentially provide clearer standards regarding firearm regulations.

Various sources, including the New York Times and SCOTUSblog, have covered the Supreme Court’s decision to hear this case. The case has generated significant interest as it has the potential to shape future interpretations of the Second Amendment and guide the application of gun regulations nationwide.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.