Domestic abusers have the right to bear arms--5th Circuit Court of Appeals

 In the U.S., the right to bear arms is a protected transaction. That can lead to some controversial decisions. 

Here's the story from Bloomberg:

Gun Ruling Giving Domestic Abusers Rights Prompts Garland Rebuke By Erik Larson

"The decades-old US law barring domestic abusers from possessing firearms contradicts the nation’s “historical tradition” of access to guns even for people who may not be “model citizens,” an appeals court said in a ruling that prompted a Justice Department rebuke.

"The statute is unconstitutional because it gives too much power to Congress to determine who qualifies as “law-abiding, responsible citizens” when it comes to gun ownership, the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals said Thursday.

...

"The ruling vacated the conviction of a Texas man, Zackey Rahimi, who pleaded guilty to violating the law by keeping a pistol at home despite being subject to a civil domestic-violence restraining order for assaulting his former girlfriend. It’s the latest fallout from a US Supreme Court ruling in June that paved the way for courts to reconsider a wide variety of gun restrictions.

...

“Rahimi, while hardly a model citizen, is nonetheless part of the political community entitled to the Second Amendment’s guarantees, all other things equal,” said the appellate panel, comprised of two judges appointed by former President Donald Trump and one by Ronald Reagan.

"Rahimi’s home was searched after he was involved in five shootings in a two-month span, including firing at a law enforcement vehicle in December 2020, firing at a driver after getting in a car accident and shooting multiple rounds in the air in January 2021 “after his friend’s credit card was declined at a Whataburger restaurant,” the appeals court said."

********

Here's the Supreme Court decision, NRA v. Bruen on which the 5th Circuit relied:

NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL.

No. 20–843. Argued November 3, 2021—Decided June 23, 2022 

Syllabus:

"New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense."