By John Kruzel
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court addressed another major gun rights dispute on Friday, agreeing to decide whether a 1994 federal law barring people who are victims of prohibition orders from owning guns to fire violates the Second Amendment of the Constitution.
Judges agreed to hear an appeal by President Joe Biden’s administration against a lower court ruling that found the law violated the Second Amendment’s ‘right to keep and bear arms’ because it did not respect “our country’s historic tradition of gun regulation”.
The case involves a Texas man charged with unlawful possession of a firearm while facing a restraining order for domestic violence after assaulting his girlfriend.
The court will hear the case during its next term, which begins in October.
The United States, with the highest rate of gun ownership in the world, remains a deeply divided nation on how to address gun violence, including frequent mass shootings, even though the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, takes a broad view of Second Amendment rights. .
In June 2022, the court expanded gun rights in a landmark decision called New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, striking down New York State limits on carrying concealed handguns at the exterior of the house.
This ruling declared for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense. He also set a new test for evaluating gun laws, saying restrictions must be “consistent with this country’s historic tradition of gun regulation,” and not simply serve an important government interest.
The 1994 statute at issue in this case prohibited a person subject to a domestic violence restraining order from owning a firearm. He initially made the crime punishable by 10 years in prison. It has since been increased to 15 years.
Zackey Rahimi of the Texas town of Kennedale challenged the law after being charged in 2021.
Rahimi, who had a history of dealing drugs, including cocaine, knocked his girlfriend to the ground after an argument in a parking lot, dragged her to his car, pushed her inside, causing her to head for the dashboard, according to a court filing. After realizing a bystander had seen his actions, according to the filing, Rahimi retrieved a gun and fired a shot. Rahimi then threatened to shoot his girlfriend. She got a court-approved restraining order, but Rahimi was arrested for raping her.
Rahimi was involved in five shootings in the Arlington, Texas area between December 2020 and January 2021, according to the filing, including one in which he fired bullets using an AR-15 rifle at the home of a person to whom he was selling drugs. He was caught with a pistol and a rifle during a police search of his home.
He asked a Texas federal judge to dismiss his charge of unlawful possession of firearms under the law, arguing that it violated the Second Amendment, which states: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the safety of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
The judge rejected his Second Amendment argument and Rahimi later pleaded guilty, receiving a six-year prison sentence. Rahimi ultimately prevailed on appeal, with the New Orleans-based US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in February declaring the law unconstitutional in a ruling that applied to Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi.
The 5th Circuit initially upheld the law but withdrew its opinion following the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling. Applying the Bruen decision, the 5th Circuit found that prohibiting those subject to domestic violence restraining orders from owning firearms was “an outlier that our ancestors would never have accepted.”
US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar told the Supreme Court on behalf of the Biden administration that the 5th Circuit’s decision was “profoundly flawed”. Prelogar wrote that “governments have long disarmed individuals who pose a threat to the safety of others” and that the 1994 law “fits comfortably into that tradition”.
Twenty-three states, mostly led by Democrats, have urged the Supreme Court to hear the dispute, as have groups advocating for the prevention of gun violence and domestic violence.
(Reporting by John Kruzel; Editing by Will Dunham)