**WASHINGTON:** On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a federal law that criminalizes the possession of firearms by individuals under domestic violence restraining orders. This decision represents a significant victory for President Joe Biden’s administration, as the justices opted not to expand gun rights further following a substantial expansion in 2022.
The 8-1 ruling overturned a lower court’s decision that had invalidated the 1994 law on the grounds that it violated the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees the right to “keep and bear arms.” The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had previously concluded that the law failed the Supreme Court’s stringent test established in 2022. This test requires gun laws to be “consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation” in order to comply with the Second Amendment.
The Biden administration argued that the law is essential for public safety and the protection of abuse victims, who are often women. The administration emphasized that disarming individuals deemed dangerous has a long tradition in the United States. They argued that the ban is particularly critical in domestic violence situations, where firearms pose a significant threat not only to the victims but also to the responding police officers.
The case at the center of this ruling involved Zackey Rahimi, a Texas man who pleaded guilty in 2021 to illegally possessing firearms while under a restraining order for assaulting his girlfriend in a parking lot and later threatening to shoot her. Rahimi’s case became a focal point in the debate over the constitutionality of the 1994 law.
The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the law highlights the ongoing tension between gun rights advocates and those who prioritize measures aimed at preventing gun violence. In their ruling, the justices reaffirmed the government’s authority to impose restrictions on firearm possession, especially in cases where there is a demonstrable risk to public safety.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had previously argued that the 1994 law did not meet the Supreme Court’s 2022 criteria, which demand that any gun regulation be deeply rooted in historical precedent. However, the Supreme Court’s recent decision indicates a broader interpretation of what constitutes acceptable firearm regulation under the Second Amendment.
President Biden’s administration welcomed the ruling, stating that it underscores the importance of maintaining laws that protect vulnerable individuals from potential harm. The administration pointed out that domestic violence situations often escalate quickly, and the presence of a firearm can turn a dangerous situation deadly.
Critics of the ruling argue that it undermines the Second Amendment rights of individuals who have not been convicted of a crime but are under restraining orders. They claim that such laws could lead to further encroachments on gun rights in the future. However, supporters of the decision maintain that it is a necessary step to curb gun violence and protect those at risk of domestic abuse.
This ruling does not only maintain the status quo but also sets a precedent for how similar cases might be handled in the future. By upholding the 1994 law, the Supreme Court has reinforced the notion that certain limitations on gun ownership are permissible, particularly when public safety is at stake.
As the debate over gun control continues to rage in the United States, this decision represents a significant moment in the ongoing effort to balance individual rights with collective security. The Supreme Court’s ruling is a reminder that while the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution, it is not without limitations, especially when those limitations serve to protect lives.