Supreme Showdown: Unpacking the United States v. Rahimi Gun Rights Battle

Enjoyed this video? Join my Locals community for exclusive content at uncivillaw.locals.com!
4 months ago
168

Facts of the case
---
Between December 2020 and January 2021, Zackey Rahimi was involved in a series of violent incidents in Arlington, Texas, including multiple shootings and a hit-and-run. Rahimi was under a civil protective order for alleged assault against his ex-girlfriend, which explicitly prohibited him from possessing firearms. Police searched his home and found a rifle and a pistol, leading to Rahimi’s indictment for violating federal law 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which makes it unlawful for someone under a domestic violence restraining order to possess firearms. Rahimi moved to dismiss the indictment on constitutional grounds but was denied, as his argument was foreclosed by United States v. McGinnis, 956 F.3d 747 (5th Cir. 2020).

Rahimi pleaded guilty but continued his constitutional challenge on appeal. As the appeal was pending, the U.S. Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 579 U.S. __ (2022). Rahimi argued that Bruen overruled McGinnis and thus that § 922(g)(8) was unconstitutional, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agreed.

Question Presented
---
Does 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, violate the Second Amendment?

Produced by Uncivil Law LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Become an UNCIVILIAN for 99 cents!: https://www.youtube.com/@uncivillaw/join
★☆★ CONTACT UNCIVIL LAW ★☆★ : https://linktr.ee/uncivillaw
★☆★ Equipment I use ★☆★: https://www.amazon.com/shop/uncivillaw/list/34X4SONFZW2G

Donate to uncivil law at ➜ https://tinyurl.com/4xufuebm
Email uncivil law at ➜ kurt@UncivilLawLLC.com

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

SwuM, Ben Belial - Reflect https://chll.to/672db1e8

Loading comments...