Supreme Court Targets Gun Control

Photo by Taylor R on Unsplash

( – Two pivotal cases before the Supreme Court could significantly reshape America’s gun control landscape. The decisions expected in this term will delve into who can lawfully possess firearms and what modifications can be made to them. These rulings are poised to impact a wide array of individuals, including those under restraining orders, their purported victims, and numerous gun owners.

The first case, ‘United States vs. Rahimi,’ revolves around Zackey Rahimi, who was involved in an altercation with his girlfriend in Arlington, Texas, in December 2019. The dispute escalated, leading to Rahimi physically assaulting her and firing a gun when a bystander noticed the incident. Despite a restraining order being issued against him, Rahimi repeatedly defied it, engaging in various threatening and violent acts, including firing a gun in public spaces and at people.

The core of the case is a federal appeals court’s decision to overturn a 1994 law that barred individuals under restraining orders from owning guns. This ruling has reached the Supreme Court, sparking intense debate. During the oral arguments, Justice Amy Coney Barrett seemed notably critical of Rahimi, highlighting the physical risk he posed to his girlfriend and child as outlined in the restraining order.

The second case, ‘Cargill v. Garland,’ addresses the classification of bump stocks. Bump stocks, which can be attached to semi-automatic firearms to increase their firing rate, were thrust into the national spotlight following the horrific mass shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada. In response to this tragedy, the ATF ruled that bump stocks are machine guns and thus subject to regulation, a decision now being contested by Michael Cargill, a Texas gun shop owner and army veteran.

These cases emerged in the wake of the landmark ‘New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen decision, where the Supreme Court directed lower courts to align gun laws with historical precedent. This has led to considerable uncertainty and inconsistent interpretations across various courts.

The outcomes of the Rahimi and Cargill cases are anticipated to provide much-needed clarity in the ongoing debate over gun ownership and regulation in the United States. Legal analysts and scholars closely watch these cases, recognizing their potential to influence the country’s gun control policies significantly.

Copyright 2023,