The Fifth Circuit Court references a Supreme Court decision in Bruen to rule that a federal ban on gun possession for individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders (DVROs) violates the Second Amendment due to a lack of Founding-era precedent. Crucially, the court notes that previous historical laws aimed at disarming certain classes, including enslaved people and racial minorities, do not support the current gun restrictions imposed on those accused but not convicted of a crime.
This ruling raises significant questions about the underlying principles of disarmament laws, particularly the government’s reliance on historical legislation with dubious origins, such as California’s 1855 “Greaser Act.” As arguments unfold, the court highlights the importance of distinguishing between historical practices that aimed to disarm individuals based purely on their presumed dangerousness and today’s context where individuals are denied gun ownership without a criminal conviction. The implications of this decision resonate deeply in ongoing debates about gun rights and public safety.
Read full story at reason.com
