Short of it,
Chief Justice Roberts wrote the opinion of the court. It seems very narrowly crafted. It is not a loss for the Second Amendment Community.
Held: When an individual has been found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another, that individual may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment
— Rahimi 602 U.S. ____ (2024)
Sotomayor filed a concurring opinion with Kagan. Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Jackson filed concurring opinions. Thomas filed a dissenting opinion.
Comments
4 responses to “Rahimi”
I’ll be interested in readying Thomas’ dissent. Hopefully tomorrow I’ll have time and I hope to compare my thoughts with what you produce Awa.
1I disagree with the ruling and it seems to me a chip in the block. If I understand correctly, restraint orders are a one-way deal. Make a claim, judge agrees, and the order is issued, so someone loses their right to bear arms with no due process. If their were due process I’d maybe agree after a finding, but not as I understand it to be currently. If I am incorrect of the process I will be VERY happy to learn so.
There must be due process and the order issued by an impartial judge. We are speaking of fundamental Constitutional rights. Otherwise, disarming orders become tools of tyrrany.
Can’t say I’m surprised here. Bad facts make for bad caselaw. Rahimi was an ass clown who shouldn’t have firearms. I think we all know that. But I am upset SC walked back ‘analogous regulation’ from history that opens it up quite a bit.