The case will test how far the court’s conservative majority is willing to go in interpreting the scope of its 2022 ruling that expanded gun rights outside the home.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday indicated it would uphold a federal law that prohibits people under domestic violence restraining orders from owning firearms, potentially limiting the scope of its own major gun rights ruling from last year.

The case gives the court’s 6-3 conservative majority a chance to consider the broad ramifications of the 2022 decision, which for the first time found that there is a right to bear arms outside the home under the Constitution’s Second Amendment.

  • @shalafi
    link
    English
    -11 year ago

    Point being, what other rights are we OK with giving up, on the strength of an accusation?

    @FunderPants said something mean to me! I believe he intends violence!

    That’s a ludicrous exaggeration, but you see where I’m going. Legal precedence is a powerful thing, and it can be used by bad actors, and it will be, bet on it.

    • Funderpants
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      All kinds of rights actually, freedom of movement when you don’t get bail, freedom of speech through a gag order, we make this kind of trade all the time because rights come into conflict. When rights come into conflict judges make decisions on which right to abridge , and which will take precedence. And you know, the safety and security of domestic violence victims is more important to me than the temporary inconvenience of a weapon owner. You can get your guns back out the box when your day in court is done ne, but dead people never come out of the box.

    • @Grimy
      link
      51 year ago

      What are they going to do next, stop me from leaving the country if I’m accused of a criminal act and potentially a flight risk? The nerve! A bunch of old dudes who didn’t wash and owned slaves told me I could go anywhere I wanted armed and goddamn it I will