Mr. Rahimi was convicted with possession of a firearm by a person under a restraining order. He contested the constitutionality of it, and the 5th Circuit ruled in his favor.
This has been fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, and it looks like they're going to hear it next session. The petition is here.
At issue is whether or not the prohibition under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8) stands up in light of the Bruen decision.
It's worth mentioning that Mr. Rahimi is, um, not a sympathetic plaintiff. He beat up his girlfriend, threatened to shoot her and a bystander, shot at someone in a road-rage incident, and fired a gun in a Whataburger when his credit card was declined.
The media is going to have a field day with this one, but it's an important question. It also bears mention that this will not affect people convicted of domestic violence. It only addresses whether the government can prohibit gun ownership for those under restraining orders.
This has been fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, and it looks like they're going to hear it next session. The petition is here.
At issue is whether or not the prohibition under 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8) stands up in light of the Bruen decision.
It's worth mentioning that Mr. Rahimi is, um, not a sympathetic plaintiff. He beat up his girlfriend, threatened to shoot her and a bystander, shot at someone in a road-rage incident, and fired a gun in a Whataburger when his credit card was declined.
The media is going to have a field day with this one, but it's an important question. It also bears mention that this will not affect people convicted of domestic violence. It only addresses whether the government can prohibit gun ownership for those under restraining orders.