Supreme Court agrees to hear consequential Second Amendment dispute
Kaelan Deese
Video Embed
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to consider if people accused of domestic violence have a right to own firearms in a case that will test the scope of the high court’s Second Amendment ruling from last summer.
The justices agreed to hear a Biden administration appeal in defense of a federal law that blocks people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing a firearm.
CALIFORNIA REPARATIONS: WHAT NEWSOM HAS SAID AHEAD OF TASK FORCE’S FINAL PROPOSAL
A Texas-based man, Zackey Rahimi, is appealing his conviction of violating that federal law, arguing the Supreme Court landmark decision in New York Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen means the federal law also violates the Second Amendment.
Last year’s decision struck down a decades-old New York law that limited who may obtain a license to carry a handgun in public. The 6-3 court also held that gun regulations should be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
The high court’s new test set off a range of lawsuits by states and gun control advocates to find historical antecedents to modern-day gun regulations. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit sided with Rahimi, finding the law was a historical “outlier that our ancestors would never have accepted.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Rahimi was involved in five shootings around the Arlington area from late 2020 to early 2021. Police identified him as a suspect, used a warrant to search his home, and found a rifle and a pistol. They also found a copy of a restraining order issued against him in 2020 after a physical altercation with his girlfriend at the time.
The case, known as U.S. v. Rahimi, will likely be heard by the justices later this year.