UNITED STATES V. RAHIMI
Case Title: United States v. Rahimi
Court: United States Supreme Court
Date: June 21, 2024
BACKGROUND:
The case of United States v. Rahimi revolves around the intersection of domestic violence and firearms regulation. Zackey Rahimi, who had a history of domestic violence, was found in possession of firearms, which is prohibited under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8). This statute bars individuals subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing firearms.
LEGAL ISSUE:
The primary legal issue in this case was whether the application of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8) to Rahimi violated his Second Amendment rights. Rahimi argued that the statute, as applied to him, infringed on his constitutional right to bear arms.
COURT'S DECISION:
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 to uphold a law that prevents individuals with domestic violence protective orders (DVPOs) from owning firearms. Chief Justice Roberts explained that temporarily disarming individuals deemed a threat to others’ safety is consistent with Second Amendment rights. The Court found that this federal law is in line with historical traditions of firearm regulation dating back to the founding era. This case marks the first use of the historical test established in the Court’s 2022 Bruen decision.
IMPLICATIONS:
The decision is important for survivors of domestic violence. By upholding this law, the Court has strengthened the rules that protect survivors from abusers with guns. This ruling ensures that people considered a threat by the courts cannot have firearms, helping to prevent more violence.
CONCLUSION:
The United States v. Rahimi case underscores the complex legal landscape surrounding domestic violence and firearm possession. It serves as a critical reminder of the need for laws that effectively protect victims while respecting constitutional rights.
At RESTT, we continue to advocate for policies that ensure the safety and well-being of survivors of domestic violence, while also being mindful of the legal principles at play.