Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS Votes 8-1 to Uphold Gun Ban for Subjects of Domestic Violence Restraining Orders
Breitbart ^ | 06/21/2024 | AWR HAWKINS

Posted on 06/21/2024 10:38:32 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) upheld on Friday a federal ban on gun ownership for subjects of domestic violence restraining orders.

The case centered on Zackey Rahimi, who had been barred from gun possession under a 1994 law prohibiting gun possession by those subject to the aforementioned restraining orders.

NBC News suggested SCOTUS’s decision shows there are some gun controls that can survive the Bruen (2022) test.

CNN quoted Chief Justice John Roberts indicating he and seven of his colleagues had “no trouble” coming together on this decision.

Writing for the majority, Roberts said, “Our tradition of firearm regulation allows the government to disarm individuals who present a credible threat to the physical safety of others.”

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; chevron; deomesticviolence; gunban; nra; scotus; secondamendment; uphold
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: ChicagoConservative27

More here:

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4245803/posts

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4245781/posts

🤔😊👍


21 posted on 06/21/2024 11:06:47 AM PDT by rktman (Destroy America from within? Check! WTH? Enlisted USN 1967 to end up with this💩? 🚫💉! 🇮🇱👍!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikelets456

I don’t know if a woke neighbor’s restraining order is more severe (and requiring a conviction) than a red flag law. But they can say you are a crazy gun nut and you get your guns taken away right away as you go through the process of them proving you “guilty”.

I was disappointed when Trump said he supported red flag laws. I hope he has changed his views.


22 posted on 06/21/2024 11:06:51 AM PDT by 21twelve (Ever Vigilant. Never Fearful.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Ironically, same-sex couples are more likely to commit/experience domestic violence


23 posted on 06/21/2024 11:08:15 AM PDT by AppyPappy (Biden told Al Roker "America is back". Unfortunately, he meant back to the 1970's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: themidnightskulker; mikelets456

“If it can be restricted it is not a Right.”

“Shall not be infringed means that-—”

What is the definition of “a right”, of that which shall not be infringed.

‘”shall not be questioned”’

Doesn’t this deny the right to free speech?


24 posted on 06/21/2024 11:09:32 AM PDT by KrisKrinkle (c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Round Earther

Why do that? It should be a local and state issue. There is nothing in the constitution that either bans or protects 2nd Amendment rights for those under a restraining order.


25 posted on 06/21/2024 11:15:05 AM PDT by MTBobcat (The “rank-and-file” are as corrupted as their leadership.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

I’m a retired female domestic law attorney. It’s true that a lot of women lie to get restraining orders. I only practiced in one county but the judges there were very careful not to grant those restraining orders, especially if there was a divorce and/or custody case pending. It does happen though. The husband/father absolutely has to fight it and sometimes even do a cross petition. The woman can get a temp order but the man needs to challenge it, if he has the money, with a good lawyer. I’ve won many of those. And one thing I often did was petition that all issues be absorbed into any pending divorce or parentage case. I had one man who was told by his wife and her mother that in that state (not mine) she would be able to get subsidized housing if she filed a PFA. I practically screamed at him not to stipulate to it.


26 posted on 06/21/2024 11:15:14 AM PDT by Mercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

Thank you for your honesty. It’s what I have always suspected.


27 posted on 06/21/2024 11:20:32 AM PDT by redshawk ( I want my red balloon. https://youtu.be/VexKSRKoWQY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KrisKrinkle

“Doesn’t this deny the right to free speech”?

Article 1 section 21 of the PA Constitution states:

‘The rights of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be questioned”.

The point of the LAW above has nothing to do with “free speech”, it is to limit government on regulating firearms or bearing arms. These are limits that government can NOT infringe upon or over reach-—yet, these criminals in government do it daily.

The only means for confiscation would be in the use of murder or coercing-—found guilty and thrown in jail. However, once released they should be returned to you-—it is your property.
All gun laws are illegal


28 posted on 06/21/2024 11:21:07 AM PDT by mikelets456
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

You’re not kidding. I’ve personally known 2 really great guys whose wives went off the deep end recently. Both women claimed violence and needed a restraining order. Both women are full of crap. Both men had police and troopers apologize to them when the dust settled because they knew the women we full of it. Both men ended up significantly more poor in all ways because of these Jezebels.


29 posted on 06/21/2024 11:24:30 AM PDT by vpintheak (Sometimes you’re the windshield, sometimes you’re the bug. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KrisKrinkle

It does.
First Amendment rights are restricted every day.

In fact. ALL of the first 10 Amendments have been violated by the Government.


30 posted on 06/21/2024 11:29:26 AM PDT by themidnightskulker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
Until I read your post, I thought it was a good decision.

Your experiences show how the system can be manipulated.

Still good for genuine victims of DV.

31 posted on 06/21/2024 11:33:09 AM PDT by Churchillspirit (Pray for President Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Start getting restraining orders slapped against agents of three letter federal agencies.....


32 posted on 06/21/2024 11:35:05 AM PDT by Tench_Coxe (The woke were surprised by the reaction to the Bud Light fiasco. May there be many more surprises)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Wait until Roberts is screwed by a lying wife and her boyfriend is coming.


33 posted on 06/21/2024 11:37:44 AM PDT by If You Want It Fixed - Fix It
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27
Justice Clarence Thomas was the lone dissent against the decision.
34 posted on 06/21/2024 11:39:21 AM PDT by mykroar ("It's Not the Nature of the Evidence; It's the Seriousness of the Charge." - El Rushbo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

First, this outcome is hardly surprising.
Second, DV restraining orders take away a lot of “rights,” including property rights (man gets booted from his home), First Amendment rights (man can’t contact wife/girlfriend), right to travel (can’t go at or near victim’s residence or work).
Third, the decision is actually GOOD in that it suggests that there has to be a specific finding by a judge that a person is a credible threat to his wife/gf. In other words, if it’s a “consent” restraining order your 2A rights may not be suspended.
Fourth, the decision didn’t address the issue as to what STANDARD a court can use in doling out restraining orders. In MD, it’s a “preponderance of the evidence” standard, which is low.


35 posted on 06/21/2024 11:53:12 AM PDT by bort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

Terrible decision. As a female family law lawyer, you wouldn’t believe how many females lie to get those restraining orders, just as a quick and dirty way to get the dad out of the house and get custody of the kids. Now those dads have no house, no access to their own kids, and no way to defend themselves.


Especially if you are in state like Maryland, where the standard is “preponderance of evidence” to get a protective order and where virtually every judge is afraid of the DV lobby.


36 posted on 06/21/2024 11:54:56 AM PDT by bort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bort

The corallary to that is that we need to prosecute all false and frivolous claims against men committing domestic violence.


37 posted on 06/21/2024 11:58:34 AM PDT by SamAdams76 (6,575,474 Truth | 87,429,044 Twitter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoConservative27

Until Domestic Violence Restraining Orders are printed on Kevlar vests, such a decision may not be a bad idea. However, a clearly defined appeal process should be in place.


38 posted on 06/21/2024 11:59:55 AM PDT by Carl Vehse (Make Austin Texas Again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: themidnightskulker

“If it can be restricted it is not a Right.”

______________________________________________________

There is not a single “Constitutional right” that is absolute and cannot be restricted some way under due process of law. That includes our right to liberty, property, or even life itself.


39 posted on 06/21/2024 12:26:00 PM PDT by Bob Wills is still the king (Just a Texas Playboy at heart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

I don’t trust government enough for this power to not be abused.


40 posted on 06/21/2024 1:14:48 PM PDT by mrmeyer (You can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him. Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson