The U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to hear a case in its fall term, which could reshape the vital debate over Second Amendment rights.
President Biden is in for yet more bad news.
Because Joe Biden just got the bad news he was dreading after the Supreme Court made this decision.
The case in question could seriously derail Joe Biden’s gun-grabbing unconstitutional agenda.
The high court agreed to hear United States v. Rahimi, a case that centers on Zackey Rahimi who allegedly was involved in five shootings between 2020 and 2021.
Police raided Rahimi’s home and found he was in possession of a firearm.
This violated the terms of a restraining order a court put on him after he allegedly assaulted an ex-girlfriend.
The issue before the Supreme Court is whether or not the government can strip citizens of their Second Amendment rights, without first convicting them of a crime.
The Fifth Circuit ruled that the government cannot strip away an individual’s Second Amendment rights without the full due process afforded to them in the criminal justice system.
“Rahimi, while hardly a model citizen, is nonetheless part of the political community entitled to the Second Amendment’s guarantees, all other things equal,” the majority ruled.
Second Amendment advocates applauded the decision, arguing this type of Orwellian gun control strips Americans of their rights without any regard for due process or the Constitution.
“One of the problems with this kind of gun control is it merely disarms a dangerous individual and then leaves them at large in society,” Gun Owners of America’s Director of Federal Affairs Aidan Johnston said in an interview with the Daily Caller. “If Zackey Rahimi is too dangerous to own a gun, then why are we letting him run around in society to go and abuse other women?”
Johnston explained that in proceedings like this one where a judge slapped a protective order on Rahimi, they often do so against both parties.
In that situation the victim of the abuse would also be prevented from owning a firearm.
That’s why it’s so important the Supreme Court steps in and rules in favor of the Constitution.
“That’s what Gun Owners of America is fighting for in this case: to empower victims with their Second Amendment rights,” Johnston added.
“An unconstitutional, broad statute like this prohibited person category can result in the good guys getting disarmed while bad guys run free.”
Second Amendment advocates believe this case could also be the first step to striking down unconstitutional red flag confiscation laws.
“The arguments for stripping citizens of a Bill of Rights guarantee just based on a restraining order are identical to the arguments for red flagging someone,” National Foundation for Gun Rights Executive Director Hannah Hill told the Daily Caller.
“The policies are very, very similar, and both should be struck down for the same reasons. You cannot deprive people of Bill of Rights guarantees unless a) they’ve committed an appropriate crime, and b) they’ve received full due process.”
Many Americans have voiced concerns about the constitutionality of the so-called Red flag laws, arguing they are unconstitutional because they deprive Americans of their Second Amendment rights without any due process.
They are a classic case of being considered guilty until proven innocent, which is the opposite of how it is supposed to work.
The first step to wipe them off the books is establishing that the government can’t take away the Second Amendment rights of American citizens who have not been convicted of any crime.
That’s why this case is critical, and why it is a good sign the Court decided to hear it.
Political Animal News will keep you up-to-date on any new developments in this ongoing story.
