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.

  • SkepticalButOpenMinded
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I would fight so that one doesn’t arbitrarily lose access to housing, food, or a drivers license, because wrongfully taking those away are life ruining. But what difference would it make to be temporarily deprived of guns? What the hell are you using it for that you can’t be parted from your guns for even a short time as a life saving precaution?

    Meanwhile, demanding a high standard of evidence for threat of spousal abuse means people die. That’s an insane trade off.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Y’all are focused on 2A rights and the gun issue. This sort of thing sets a precedent for taking other rights.

      FFS, can no one see past the issue at hand and see how badly this precedent can be abused?!

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not even a 2nd ammendment case, it’s a 5th ammendment issue, which most people arr completely ignoring.