US Supreme Court Decision upholding laws for domestic violence and gun licenses

VetteGirlMA

NES Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
8,954
Likes
22,156
Location
western mass
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
I didn't see anything about this on NES, and I was wondering if there are any opinions on this.

The decision is here:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/14-10154_19m1.pdf


To me and I'm not a lawyer, it seems to lower the bar for spousal abuse to now include unintentional harm as a reason to revoke someones gun license. Am I reading this correct? I would love to hear what the folks at Comm2A think about this decision and its impact. Thanks!
 
SCOTUS thinks that Congress has the authority to limit the 2A. They have consistently held this in cases for a long time now. This judgement isn't really anything new - they are simply affirming that the law is what it is. Congress wrote it vaguely enough that reckless violence is considering the same as intentional violence - Congress could fix this if they wanted to. They won't.
 
SCOTUS thinks that Congress has the authority to limit the 2A. They have consistently held this in cases for a long time now. This judgement isn't really anything new - they are simply affirming that the law is what it is. Congress wrote it vaguely enough that reckless violence is considering the same as intentional violence - Congress could fix this if they wanted to. They won't.

More importantly, there was no second amendment claim that this reading of the law is constitutional. Only that the law says what the government wanted it to say in this case, which is absurd, but likely accurate. Whether it's constitutional to limit 2A rights to people in these circumstances is another story and not a question answered the other day.
 
More importantly, there was no second amendment claim that this reading of the law is constitutional. Only that the law says what the government wanted it to say in this case, which is absurd, but likely accurate. Whether it's constitutional to limit 2A rights to people in these circumstances is another story and not a question answered the other day.
The restrictions on felons owning guns has been referred to as long standing and OK in other scotus decisions.
 
Isnt the argument the same? Misdemeanor convictions resulting in right revocation means that there was still due process involved in the loss of rights.

Yes, but the 2A question not answered by this SCOTUS is whether the lifetime loss triggered by §921/922 constitutional.
 
Back
Top Bottom