Cases & Developments

Opinion reversing the judgment of the Fifth Circuit. Zackey Rahimi was “indicted on one count of possessing a firearm while subject to a domestic violence restraining order, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(8).” He pleaded guilty and challenged the law as facially inconsistent with the Second Amendment. After the Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, the Fifth Circuit agreed with Rahimi, finding that Section 922(g)(8) violates Bruen’s requirement that such a law must fit within “the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” The Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed. In an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, the Court found that (1) the surety laws, long entrenched in common law, “could be invoked to prevent all forms of violence, including spousal abuse” at least on a temporary basis; and (2) a subset of common law known as “going armed” laws “provided a mechanism for punishing those who had menaced others with firearms.” The Court had “no trouble concluding that Section 922(g)(8) survives Rahimi’s facial challenge,” concluding “an individual found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.”