Law barring people with domestic violence restraining orders from having guns is unconstitutional, court rules | CNN Politics

  • 📰 CNN
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 22 sec. here
  • 2 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 12%
  • Publisher: 95%

Law Law Headlines News

Law Law Latest News,Law Law Headlines

A federal law that prohibits people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms is unconstitutional, a conservative-leaning appeals court has ruled

The ruling is the latest significant decision dismantling a gun restriction in the wake of the Supreme Court’s expansion of Second Amendment rights last year in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen decision.

“The purpose of these ‘dangerousness’ laws was the preservation of political and social order, not the protection of an identified person from the specific threat posed by another,” the 5th Circuit opinion read. “Therefore, laws disarming ‘dangerous’ classes of people are not ‘relevantly similar’” to “serve as historical analogues.” A spokesperson for the Justice Department did not immediately respond to a CNN inquiry.

 

Thank you for your comment. Your comment will be published after being reviewed.
Please try again later.

Bruhhhhhh.... WELL-REGULATED, you know what that means?

What could possibly go wrong?

So now it ok to have domestic charges to have a gun let all have guns let everybody get a gun now include kids it’s ok to take gun to school it save lives these gun nuts why they don’t shoot themself first and let us know how it feel it feel good than I be gun nut too

When the 'right to bare arms' was written in the constitution it was meant for self defence, not murder. Secondly automatic weapons were not thought of then.

It's clear that to conservatives, the rights of men always outweigh the lives of women and children.

Unf879ingbelievable.

That is pretty out there if that Circuit is becoming infamous for that too

Baloney!

A neighbor that just doesn't like you can get a restraining order against you with little proof.

What is the requirement that a complainant must meet to obtain a restraining order on another?

The Blood of innocent victims will be in their hands! This is not an insignificant ruling, it’s a death sentence for many abused women and their families. Shame on them! The required protection of the vulnerable victims is now much harder to achieve.

No

A ruling like that in Africa or Asia would be deemed militant or extremist by the American MSM. In the US it’s just “conservative - leaning”

Insane. The ruling was absurd.

This is just ridiculous and dangerous.

We're so fucked

The conservative WAR ON WOMEN continues.

Wtf

Non sense

Right wing judges are ruling their political views into our lives.

Prohibiting felons who have already paid their dues from voting must also be unconstitutional then!

We have summarized this news so that you can read it quickly. If you are interested in the news, you can read the full text here. Read more:

 /  🏆 4. in LAW

Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Minnesota governor signs bill codifying 'fundamental right' to abortion into law | CNN PoliticsMinnesota's Democratic Gov. Tim Walz signed a bill into law Tuesday that enshrines the 'fundamental right' to access abortion in the state. Sickening 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿🙌🏿🙌🏿🙌🏿 Gross
Source: CNN - 🏆 4. / 95 Read more »