A Supreme Court justice on Tuesday appeared to accept arguments in favor of preserving a federal law that prohibits individuals under domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms.
The 1994 law was struck down by the New Orleans-based US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this year after a panel of judges ruled that it failed the test set by the Supreme Court’s landmark 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc v Bruen, who wants gun laws to be “consistent with the historical tradition of national gun regulation.”
Attorney General Elizabeth Prelogar, who argued on behalf of the Biden administration, told the court that the law – intended to protect victims of domestic abuse – was consistent with the country’s long-standing practice of restricting dangerous people, such as “rebels, insurgents, children under age.” , individuals with mental illness, criminals and drug addicts” from accessing firearms.
“Guns and domestics are a deadly combination,” added Prelogar.
A federal law barring people with domestic violence restraining orders from owning firearms was struck down by the 5th Circuit earlier this year.REUTERS “Firearms and domestic violence are a deadly combination,” Attorney General Elizabeth Prelogar told high court Tuesday. ZUMAPRESS.com
Zackey Rahimi, the petitioner in the case, is accused of beating his girlfriend and firing his gun at witnesses in a Fort Worth, Texas parking lot in December 2019.
Rahimi’s girlfriend obtained an order of protection against him in February 2020, after Rahimi threatened to shoot her, according to the Justice Department.
Eleven months later, Rahimi’s apartment was searched by the police and a firearm was found. He pleaded guilty to violating federal gun laws, setting the case in motion.
“You don’t have any doubt that your client is a dangerous person, do you?” Chief Justice John Roberts asked Rahimi’s lawyer, J. Matthew Wright, on Tuesday.
Wright replied that it depends on the meaning of “dangerous.”
“Well, it means someone who shoots, you know, at people. That’s a good start,” Roberts replied.
Zackey Rahimi, the petitioner in the case, is accused of hitting his girlfriend and firing his gun at witnesses in a parking lot in Fort Worth, Texas, in December 2019. Tarrant County Sheriff’s Office
Judge Brett Kavanaugh expressed concern that upholding the 5th Circuit’s ruling could threaten the background check system that the Biden administration claims has prevented 75,000 gun sales over the past 25 years to individuals under domestic violence protection orders.
Justice Elena Kagan argued that “there seems to be some division and some confusion about what Bruen means and what Bruen requires in the lower courts,” referencing the court’s June 2022 decision.
Since the high court’s decision in Bruen, lower courts have used precedent to strike down a number of long-standing gun control laws in states across the country.
A lower court used precedent to strike down New York City’s gun licensing regime, which allowed city officials to reject applicants for firearms based on their “moral character”; rules against California’s 33-year-old law banning assault weapons; and block New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s emergency order suspending the right to carry firearms in public in Albuquerque and surrounding counties.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule in US v. Rahimi in the summer of 2024.
Categories: Trending
Source: thtrangdai.edu.vn/en/
