It was only a year ago that the Supreme Court issued a landmark Second Amendment opinion that expanded gun rights nationwide and established that firearms rules must be consistent with the nationโs โhistorical tradition.โ
Majority opinion author Justice Clarence Thomas infuriated supporters of gun control and elatedย advocates of gun rightsย but also generated confusion among lower court judges who found themselves reconsidering thousands of firearms rules.
Now, on Tuesday, the justices will gather again, in the wake of the yet another mass shooting, to consider the scope of its 2022 decision inย New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, this time in the context of domestic violence.
The Supreme Court is considering aย section of federal lawย that bars an individual subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a firearm.
The Supreme Courtโs ultimate decision could impact almost every type of gun control law, including one that President Joe Bidenโs own son is charged with violating.
โRahimi offers a chance for the justices to clarify aspects of Bruenโs test that have divided lower courts โ including how judges should assess the historical tradition of gun regulation and how closely modern laws must mirror those that existed during the Founding Era,โ said Andrew M. Willinger of the Duke University School of Law.
Lower courts have cited Bruen in cases blocking laws restricting the use ofย concealed firearms, prohibiting guns inย houses of worshipย andย banning assault weapons.
Last month in California, for instance, a federal judge struck down an assault weapon ban the state argued was needed to prevent mass shooters from acquiring those weapons. Many of the banned guns, the judge said, are also commonly used by โlaw-abidingโ citizens for self-defense.
…
Read the full article here
Leave a Reply