Restraining Orders and Second Amendment Rights

Federal law prohibits someone who has a domestic violence restraining order filed against them from possessing a firearm if that restraining order includes a finding that they present a credible threat to the physical safety of an intimate partner or their child. The case of United States v. Rahimi explored whether such a provision can be enforced without violating an individual’s Second Amendment right.

Background of the Case

Rahimi and his girlfriend, with whom he shares a child, met for lunch in December 2019. The two began arguing during the meal and Rahimi became enraged. When his girlfriend tried to leave, Rahimi grabbed her and dragged her back to his car. She hit her head on the dashboard when Rahimi shoved her into the vehicle.

A bystander witnessed the incident and upon realizing this Rahimi retrieved a gun from his car. When his girlfriend fled, he fired the gun. It was unknown whether he was shooting at his girlfriend or the witness. He later called his girlfriend and threatened to shoot her if she reported the altercation.

Girlfriend’s Response

Despite this threat, Rahimi’s girlfriend sought a restraining order, in which she detailed numerous assaults and how Rahimi’s behavior was a danger to their child. A restraining order was issued against Rahimi by a Texas court prohibiting him for two years from threatening his girlfriend or contacting her except to discuss their child. Rahimi’s gun license was also suspended for two years.

Rahimi violated the order a few months later. Then, later that year, he threatened another woman with a gun, leading to a charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. After being arrested, he was identified as a suspect in at least five additional shootings. When executing a search warrant at Rahimi’s home, they found numerous firearms and ammunition.

He was indicted in Texas on one count of possessing a firearm while subject to a domestic violence restraining order, and he moved to dismiss the indictment. He argued that the provision prohibiting him from possessing firearms violated his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Ruling

While the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right in the United States, the country’s firearm laws have consistently included provisions that prevent individuals who threaten others with physical harm from misusing firearms. When the government institutes laws that regulate Constitutional rights such as the right to bear arms, it must justify this regulation.

Because Rahimi challenged the provision prohibiting him from possessing firearms on its face, the government needed only to show that this regulation is Constitutional in some applications. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the provision was Constitutional in Rahimi’s case. It was shown that Rahimi posed a credible threat to the physical safety of a person protected by the restraining order. Since the Second Amendment allows individuals to be disarmed if they pose a credible threat to another’s safety, the restraining order provision did not violate Rahimi’s Second Amendment right.

Your attorney must understand that the individual is the expert in their case, especially in a domestic matter. Woodruff Family Law Group is here to help.