Posted on 03/26/2014 12:30:59 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian
WASHINGTON (AP) -- People convicted of minor domestic violence offenses can be barred from possessing guns even in states where no proof of physical violence is required to support the domestic violence charge, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
The ruling was a victory for the Obama administration, gun control groups and advocates for victims of domestic abusers who say the gun ban is critical in preventing the escalation of domestic violence.
The justices unanimously rejected the argument put forth by gun rights groups and a Tennessee man who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor domestic assault against the mother of his child in 2001. The man, James Castleman, was then charged in 2009 with illegal possession of a firearm after he and his wife were accused of buying guns and selling them on the black market.
Federal law bars a person convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence involving the use of physical force or a deadly weapon from possessing a firearm.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
No, the Court did not create any special relationship. State legislatures in all 50 states made domestic violence a separate crime from ordinary assault. Congress then said that people convicted of that crime cannot possess guns. (And the Lautenberg Amendment was enacted unanimously, or nearly so, IIRC.) Blame the state legislators and Congress, not the Court. The Court is enforcing what Congress said; to do otherwise would be judicial activism. (Unless the statute is unconstitutional, of course, but the defendant in this case did not challenge the constitutionality of the Lautenberg Amendment.)
It’s hardly worth it, but in my original comment, I lamented that there was no challenge to the constitutionality of defining some groups as more special than others and suggested that they would rue not pressing that issue.
I am not saying in any way that convictions should not be used to deny a person their right to bear arms as that involves due process. I do doubt that inequity in application of the law is a different matter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.