The Supreme Court has affirmed a longstanding law prohibiting individuals under restraining orders due to suspected domestic violence from owning firearms, ruling 8-1 in favor of the restriction. This decision upholds a federal statute that has been in place for three decades, despite a lower court previously striking it down as inconsistent with historical firearm regulations in the nation.
Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, emphasizing the policy’s alignment with common sense in disarming individuals who pose a clear threat of physical violence. He highlighted that preventing potential harm outweighs the argument against restricting Second Amendment rights.
The case centered around Zackey Rahimi, a Texas resident known for prior violent incidents involving firearms against girlfriends and in public settings. Justice Clarence Thomas was the sole dissenter, expressing concerns about potential broader implications on Second Amendment liberties.
Friday’s ruling stands as a significant instance of firearms regulation prevailing in the Supreme Court, which is often divided on such matters. It underscores the court’s stance on prioritizing public safety in cases involving domestic violence, reinforcing restrictions to mitigate risks associated with gun ownership among those with histories of abusive behavior.