People under domestic violence orders can own guns -U.S. appeals court rules
Adds comment from U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland
By Jonathan Stempel
Feb 2 (Reuters) -A U.S. appeals court on Thursday declared unconstitutional a federal law making it a crime for people under domestic violence restraining orders to own firearms.
The decision by a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is the latest victory for gun rights advocates since a Supreme Court rulinglast June granting a broad right for people to carry firearms outside the home.
That ruling, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, announced a new test for assessing firearms laws, saying restrictions must be "consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation," and not simply advance an important government interest.
In Thursday's decision, Circuit Judge Cory Wilson said banning people under domestic violence restraining orders from owning firearms "embodies salutary policy goals meant to protect vulnerable people in our society."
But the judge, appointed by Donald Trump, said the Bruen ruling madesuch a consideration irrelevant, and that from a historical perspective the ban was "an outlier that our ancestors would never have accepted."
The court threw out the guilty plea and six-year prison sentence for Zackey Rahimi, who admitted to possessing guns found in his Kennedale, Texas, home after prosecutors said he participated in five shootings in Dec. 2020 and Jan. 2021.
Rahimi had been under a restraining order since Feb. 2020, following his alleged assault of a former girlfriend.
A federal public defender representing Rahimi did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
U.S. Attorney GeneralMerrick Garland, in a written statement disagreed with the 5th Circuit's ruling and said the Biden administration would appeal.
"Whether analyzed through the lens of Supreme Court precedent, or of the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment, that statute is constitutional," Garland said. "Accordingly, the Department will seek further review of the Fifth Circuit’s contrary decision.”
The 5th Circuit is based in New Orleans, and its decision applies in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi.
It had upheld the federal law last June 8, just over two weeks before the Bruen decision, but withdrew its opinion and ordered additional briefing.
Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; additional reporting by Dan Whitcomb; Editing by Bill Berkrot and Raju Gopalakrishnan
免責聲明: XM Group提供線上交易平台的登入和執行服務，允許個人查看和/或使用網站所提供的內容，但不進行任何更改或擴展其服務和訪問權限，並受以下條款與條例約束：（i）條款與條例；（ii）風險提示；（iii）完全免責聲明。網站內部所提供的所有資訊，僅限於一般資訊用途。請注意，我們所有的線上交易平台內容並不構成，也不被視為進入金融市場交易的邀約或邀請 。金融市場交易會對您的投資帶來重大風險。
所有缐上交易平台所發佈的資料，僅適用於教育/資訊類用途，不包含也不應被視爲適用於金融、投資稅或交易相關諮詢和建議，或是交易價格紀錄，或是任何金融商品或非應邀途徑的金融相關優惠的交易邀約或邀請。
本網站的所有XM和第三方所提供的内容，包括意見、新聞、研究、分析、價格其他資訊和第三方網站鏈接，皆爲‘按原狀’，並作爲一般市場評論所提供，而非投資建議。請理解和接受，所有被歸類為投資研究範圍的相關内容，並非爲了促進投資研究獨立性，而根據法律要求所編寫，而是被視爲符合營銷傳播相關法律與法規所編寫的内容。請確保您已詳讀並完全理解我們的非獨立投資研究提示和風險提示資訊，相關詳情請點擊 這裡查看。
