Now in Rahimi, the Supreme Court is due to decide whether the homes of domestic violence victims could be flooded with lethal firearms. The case will come to court after the 5th Circuit Court ruled in favor of the abuser. The Fifth Circuit has ruled that the government cannot stop an abuser for whom the court has issued a domestic violence protection order from possessing a lethal firearm. By overturning a federal law designed to protect victims of abuse, an appeals court has launched an outrageous legal theory that claims individuals with domestic violence orders have a constitutional right to own a gun. .Using Judge Thomas’ Argument Focused on Judge Bruen’s History As a precedent, the Supreme Court may rule that today’s domestic violence victims deserve only 18th-century protection. At that time, most women could not vote, own property or work outside the home.
No more stakes. About 41 percent of women and 26 percent of men in the United States have experienced intimate partner sexual, physical, or stalking, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey. It is reported to be affected during the period. their lifetime. About one in five homicide victims are killed by an intimate partner, and more than half of female homicide victims are killed by a current or former male intimate partner, according to U.S. crime reports. Here in New York, about 80,000 assaults, sex crimes, protection order violations and other serious crimes occur statewide each year, and data shows that about one in five murders in New York is domestic violence. said to be related.
The Supreme Court has options. Either lean on the Fifth Circuit’s dangerous theory that guns cannot be regulated to protect victims of domestic violence, or support federal laws that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. is.
Until oral arguments are heard, there is no way of knowing which decision the Supreme Court will make. The precedent set by Bruen is very troubling. But even within Bruen’s court majority there was a split. Justice Thomas continued to focus on the historical debate. But Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s assent, which was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, noted that “correctly construed, the Second Amendment allows for ‘variety’ of gun controls,” noting that certain fundamental left room for more protection.
The agreement helped inform New York’s response to Bruen. After 100 years of gun control were overturned in New York State, I took immediate steps to restore protections from gun violence, including signing new laws to strengthen training and gun licensing requirements. I was. In the spring of 2022, we will strengthen our state’s red flag laws, take guns away from people who pose a danger to themselves and others, including domestic abusers, and close the loopholes that made the Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas tragedies possible. I got it. As a result, courts issued nearly 9,000 extremely dangerous protection orders in the past year, up from 1,400 over the past two-and-a-half years. Depending on the extent of the court’s ruling in Rahimi, these protections could also be jeopardized. After a brief spike at the start of the pandemic in 2020, New York is slowly and steadily returning to pre-pandemic shooting levels, with one of the top five lowest firearm-related death rates. As Governor, I have always said public safety is my number one priority, and I am committed to using every tool available to protect our communities from gun violence.