A federal appeals court reportedly ruled Thursday that a decades-old gun statute prohibiting persons under domestic abuse protection orders from carrying weapons is unconstitutional, citing a historic Supreme Court case that established a new paradigm for gun regulations.
The 1994 law had previously prevented anyone under an order of protection for stalking, harassment or other similar crimes from being able to receive firearms.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that the federal criminal statute did not fit within the tradition of firearms regulation in the United States, something that the Supreme Court now requires of all gun laws via its ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (NYSRPA v. Bruen).
According to the verdict, the court’s decision came after an appeal was filed in the United States of America v. Zackey Rahimi case, in which Rahimi was accused with having a handgun while under a domestic violence protection order.
According to Rahimi’s appeal, his charges were illegal in light of the precedent set by the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision.
LEGAL ALERT: The Fifth Circuit has struck down 922(g)(8), saying that the government failed to demonstrate that it "fits within our Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation." https://t.co/y1Z6msPvta pic.twitter.com/69zl5vuq43
— FPC Action Foundation (@FPCAction) February 2, 2023
“In sum, our Founders envisioned a nation in which both citizen and sovereign alike play important roles in protecting the innocent against violent criminals. Our decision today is consistent with that vision. I concur,” the ruling concluded.
[READ MORE: Inflation Continues To Stress Out Americans, Time Mag Offers Ways To Cope]
