"If you add up the votes, the two of them together were necessary for the majority. The path to victory likely involves winning the votes of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh.Īlthough both were part of the 6-3 conservative majority in Bruen, Kavanaugh wrote a separate concurring opinion joined by Roberts in which he outlined what he called "the limits of the court's decision," making it clear that the Second Amendment does allow for gun regulations.Ĭiting previous court rulings, Kavanaugh specifically highlighted the prohibition on the possession of firearms by felons and people with mental illnesses as an example of laws that were not under threat. To do so without overturning Bruen, they would need to find that those restrictions are consistent with the historical understanding of the Second Amendment. He was prosecuted separately for violating the federal gun restriction law and, before the Supreme Court had issued its new gun rights ruling, argued that the case should be dismissed because of his Second Amendment right to bear arms.įor those favoring gun control, the hope is that there is a majority on the Supreme Court that will uphold long-standing provisions like the one at issue in the Rahimi case. Rahimi faced state charges for the domestic assault and another assault against a different woman. While the protective order was in effect, Rahimi was implicated in a series of shootings, including one incident in which he allegedly fired bullets into a house using an AR-15 rifle, the federal government says. He also allegedly fired a shot from his gun after realizing that a bystander was watching. Zackey Rahimi, an accused drug dealer in Texas whose partner obtained a restraining order in February 2020, is one such person.ĭuring an incident in an Arlington, Texas, parking lot the previous year recounted by the federal government in court papers, Rahimi was accused of knocking the woman to the ground, dragging her to his car and pushing her inside, knocking her head on the dashboard in the process. One of those provisions - 922(g)(8) - concerns anyone "subject to a court order" in which they were found to be a threat to a domestic partner or child. While gun rights activists have taken aim at state and local restrictions in the aftermath of the Supreme Court ruling, a key battleground is on a series of federal restrictions that are listed in a section of law called 18 U.S. "Now we see not only more decisions more quickly, but we see decisions striking down laws not thought to raise serious Second Amendment problems in the first place," said Jake Charles, an expert on firearms law at Pepperdine University's law school. ![]() The immediate impact of Bruen seems to suggest that lower courts, which have tilted to the right in recent years because of the appointments made by former President Donald Trump, have received the message this time. The conservative majority, in deciding Bruen, appeared concerned that lower courts had not cast a more skeptical eye on gun restrictions after the Supreme Court's previous major gun rights ruling in 2008. Bruen requires judges to focus solely on whether a law comports with a historical understanding of the Second Amendment. ![]() The new test the Supreme Court adopted in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. The justices are scheduled to discuss in private on Thursday whether to hear the case in what will be the first real test of how broadly the court’s conservative majority wants its 2022 ruling to be interpreted. Now the issue is back on the Supreme Court’s doorstep again, with the Biden administration asking the court to reverse the lower court ruling that invalidated the federal law barring people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms. ![]() It has also led to blue states passing a new wave of gun laws in the hope that they will not fall foul of the Supreme Court’s rationale. Other judges have upheld gun restrictions, creating divisions on the law across the country. The decision by the Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority has led to a flurry of challenges to long-standing laws - both federal and state - and prompted some judges to find they are unlawful under the new standard. And a third found that the federal law prohibiting people under 21 from owning firearms is unlawful.Īll of these recent rulings by lower federal courts are the product of court decisions striking blows against long-standing federal gun restrictions that were issued by lower court judges in the past year after the Supreme Court, in a sweeping ruling, expanded gun rights by finding for the first time that the Constitution’s Second Amendment right to bear arms extends outside the home.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |