Videos tagged with Domestic Violence Restraining Order

This video provides an expert-level breakdown of the Supreme Court's 8-1 decision in United States v. Rahimi and its implications for the Range v. Garland case. The speaker, an experienced firearms instructor and legal analyst, explains how Rahimi upheld federal firearm prohibitions for those under domestic violence restraining orders, while Range challenges the permanent disarmament of individuals with non-violent felony convictions. The analysis highlights the distinction between temporary and permanent disarmament and the ongoing legal arguments regarding historical tradition and the scope of Second Amendment rights.

This video provides a deep dive into the upcoming Rahimi v. United States Supreme Court case, focusing on the Second Amendment implications of disarming individuals with domestic violence restraining orders. Constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith explains the core legal question: whether 18 USC § 922(g)(8) is constitutional and if individuals subject to such orders are considered part of 'the People' protected by the Second Amendment. The analysis also explores historical context, the meaning of 'the People' in other legal contexts, and the potential impact of the ruling on gun rights. The content emphasizes understanding the 'four boxes' of American liberty to defend constitutional rights.

An appellate court ruling from the 5th Circuit has declared federal law 18 USC 922(g)(8), which prohibits firearm possession by individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders, unconstitutional. The court, citing the Supreme Court's Bruen decision, found that the government failed to demonstrate historical precedent for such a broad restriction on Second Amendment rights. This ruling vacates convictions under this statute, emphasizing that the right to bear arms is presumed unless the government can prove the individual is not law-abiding and that the restriction aligns with historical tradition.