Rahimi v. United States in SCOTUS at 10am today! Audio link provided

[hostak126]

https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/live.aspx

[hostak126]

Whether 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8), which prohibits the
possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-
violence restraining orders, violates the Second Amendment on its face.

 

[Kayak Ken]

I consider myself a very strong 2nd amendment supporter but not sure how I feel about this one. This guy Rahimi was an absolute criminal (worst of the worst) , the last person you would want to have a firearm. But I don't believe people should lose their second amendment rights over these restraining orders. Judges hand these out like candy on Halloween. You can go to the courts with a story and no evidence and its granted. This person then loses their second amendment without any burden of proof. Then if you want to appeal this, it takes months if your lucky. For most it is years. I think restraining orders should have a filing fee of a few hundred dollars, then be preceded by a mandatory in person court hearing for all parties that week. 

[Farmingdales Finest]

I feel the same as you and like your idea of having to go to court about it upfront with the fee causing the accuser to  have skin in the game. 

 

[JimmyScags]

No doubt that Rahimi is a dirtbag but my issue, like everyone else, is lack of due process. You could have a vengeful ex put a restraining order on you without being afforded due process, 30 years later you’re living on opposite sides of the country and haven’t spoken since, guess what, you’re still a prohibited person. There have been plenty of other opportunities to strip this guy of his rights, but for me, a restraining order doesn’t cut it, at least when we’re talking about something permanent.

Edited November 7, 2023 by JimmyScags

[Bucndoe]

4 hours ago, Kayak Ken said:

I consider myself a very strong 2nd amendment supporter but not sure how I feel about this one. This guy Rahimi was an absolute criminal (worst of the worst) , the last person you would want to have a firearm. But I don't believe people should lose their second amendment rights over these restraining orders. Judges hand these out like candy on Halloween. You can go to the courts with a story and no evidence and its granted. This person then loses their second amendment without any burden of proof. Then if you want to appeal this, it takes months if your lucky. For most it is years. I think restraining orders should have a filing fee of a few hundred dollars, then be preceded by a mandatory in person court hearing for all parties that week. 

The parties in the protection order already must appear within 10 days of issuance. Some do, some don't. No two situations are the same. Just because a restraining order is granted one does not automatically loose their 2A rights, they are prohibited temporarily while the order is in effect.

Once dismissed there is a process to get firearms and FID back, and to have the prohibitions lifted or to have the firearms forfeited and have the person deemed ineligible.  It's not automatic either way and is spelled out in statute. It's a process that must go through the Courts.

There are also differences with TRO's  (Temporary Restraining Order) and FRO's (Final Restraining Orders) and how they are addressed in NJ statute.

Way too much to get into in an internet post but my point is that nothing is automatic and there are remedies to restore privileges and also to lose them permanently in NJ.

Edited November 7, 2023 by Bucndoe

[hostak126]

Mark Smith's take on the arguments today

 

[Kayak Ken]

6 hours ago, Bucndoe said:

The parties in the protection order already must appear within 10 days of issuance. Some do, some don't. No two situations are the same. Just because a restraining order is granted one does not automatically loose their 2A rights, they are prohibited temporarily while the order is in effect.

Once dismissed there is a process to get firearms and FID back, and to have the prohibitions lifted or to have the firearms forfeited and have the person deemed ineligible.  It's not automatic either way and is spelled out in statute. It's a process that must go through the Courts.

There are also differences with TRO's  (Temporary Restraining Order) and FRO's (Final Restraining Orders) and how they are addressed in NJ statute.

Way too much to get into in an internet post but my point is that nothing is automatic and there are remedies to restore privileges and also to lose them permanently in NJ.

Yes, I am very familiar with the laws regarding Order of Protections. You stated the NJ procedure. This is not consistent throughout the country. That is why I believe we need a federal ruling on this.

[Jcol6268]

I wish it wasn't a scumbag being used to represent the issue. I can see the case going either way but leaning not in our favor. I rarely see a TRO get denied anymore. For the craziest reasons. FRO's are becoming the same way. I've seen some ridiculous FRO's be granted lately. It wasn't long ago when a judge would truly look deep into taking the rights away of the accused. I haven't seen a judge do that in any cases I've seen lately.