5th Circuit Court strikes down 922(g)(8).

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Not sure what this means. But Bruen is still making waves.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

It means another piece of §922 is going down in flames. Remember what I said, slowly at first then all at once.

Everyone go read about Reconstruction and Jim Crow, this will be a long war, but Gorr . . . er, Bruen, is just getting started.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

922(g)(8) defines anyone subject to a restraining order as being prohibited from possessing firearms.

I assume the court is just striking the blanket ban, and would allow prohibition as an individual term in a restraining order. This will likely accelerate the spread of red-flag laws (until those are struck down as well)

 

[DadSmith]

How can any right be stripped away without due process?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

How can any right be stripped away without due process?

By a mere majority of votes or 5-4 court decision, enforced by men with guns. Pretty simple, actually.

 

[DadSmith]

By a mere majority of votes or 5-4 court decision, enforced by men with guns. Pretty simple, actually.

Yet it's not constitutional or has it been challenged and ruled that it is constitutional?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Yet it's not constitutional or has it been challenged and ruled that it is constitutional?

What is “constitutional”? Judges support things all the time that on its face doesn’t seem constitutional. Politicians support all manner of bills in the state house and in Congress every session they insist protect some right and are constitutional.

 

[DadSmith]

What is “constitutional”? Judges support things all the time that on its face doesn’t seem constitutional. Politicians support all manner of bills in the state house and in Congress every session they insist protect some right and are constitutional.

So it could be contested and a different judge could rule it unconstitutional.

 

[indyjohn]

So it could be contested and a different judge could rule it unconstitutional.

Of course!

 

[DadSmith]

Of course!

That is what is needed.
Every time they make a law that deprives people of their rights without due process it should be challenged.

 

[Alamo]

Fifth Circuit Holds People Can't Be Disarmed Just Based on Civil Restraining Order

Judge James Ho concurs, adding "I write separately to point out that our Founders firmly believed in the fundamental role of government in protecting citizens against violence, as well as the individual right to keep and bear arms—and that these two principles are not inconsistent but entirely...

reason.com

From the majority opinion

The question presented in this case is not whether prohibiting the possession of firearms by someone subject to a domestic violence restraining order is a laudable policy goal. The question is whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), a specific statute that does so, is constitutional under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. In the light of N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n, Inc. v. Bruen (2022), it is not.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

 

[Denny347]

I doubt this will make very many waves outside of Texas/Louisiana. Yes, lots of people talking about it but in reality, I don't see many of the other Circuits following suit.

 

[BiscuitsandGravy]

 

[Ark]

It is long past time to reel in the entire vast system of evidence-free, unilateral court orders infringing rights and confiscating property. This needs to go so much further than 2A.