There is a long and evolving history regarding the right to privacy in the United States. In the context of American jurisprudence, the Supreme Court first recognized the “right to privacy” in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965).
Does 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits people under domestic-violence restraining orders from possessing firearms, violate the Second Amendment?
This case asks the Supreme Court to decide whether 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8), which bans firearm possession for someone under a civil protective order due to domestic violence, violates the Second Amendment on its face. Petitioner United States argues that the ban does not violate the Second Amendment because the history and tradition of firearm regulations in the United States allow Congress to disarm individuals who are not law-abiding, responsible citizens, such as those subject to civil protective orders. In opposition, Respondent Zackey Rahimi contends that § 922(g)(8) violates the Second Amendment on its face because the Second Amendment protects the firearm rights of all United States citizens and § 922(g)(8) bears no resemblance to any firearm regulations in American history. The outcome of this case will affect the constitutionality of laws that address domestic violence, as well as how future gun regulations will be analyzed.
Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, violates the Second Amendment on its face.
Between December 2020 and January 2021, Respondent Zackey Rahimi was involved in five shootings. United States v. Rahimi at 2. On December 1, Rahimi sold drugs to a buyer and, when the buyer talked badly about him, fired multiple shots into the buyer’s residence with an AR-15 rifle.
