Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

"Ensuring that convicted abusers do not have access to firearms will save lives," said Kim Gandy, president and CEO of the National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV). (Photo: Jeff Kubina/flickr/cc)

No, Convicted Domestic Abusers Can't Own Guns, SCOTUS Affirms

'This is really important and relevant gun-control policy, as opposed to the xenophobic and largely irrelevant no-fly list.'

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday affirmed (pdf) a federal law that bars those convicted of misdemeanor domestic assault from owning a firearm.

In doing so, the court struck down an unusual argument from two Maine residents who pleaded guilty to domestic violence charges, but asserted that their assaults on their former girlfriends had been "reckless" rather than knowing or intentional. Therefore, they argued, their actions should neither have qualified as a "use of physical force" nor triggered the federal gun ban.

Victim advocacy groups celebrated the court's decision.

"The Supreme Court today affirmed what we know—domestic violence escalates and is often deadly. Ensuring that convicted abusers do not have access to firearms will save lives," said Kim Gandy, president and CEO of the National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV), in a statement.

"This is really important and relevant gun-control policy, as opposed to the xenophobic and largely irrelevant no-fly list," argued author and activist Rebecca Solnit on Facebook.

Indeed, NNEDV explained the rationale behind the federal legislation that bars convicted abusers from owning firearms:

Many perpetrators of domestic violence are often convicted only of misdemeanor crimes. In fact, the Supreme Court opinion states that 35 jurisdictions have assault laws extending to recklessness, and the "petitioners’ reading risked allowing domestic abusers of all mental states to evade 922(g)(9)’s firearms ban." (p.9) Studies show these misdemeanor perpetrators often escalate the severity of their abuse over time, and the presence of a firearm can increase chances of homicide by nearly 500 percent.

Solnit added, "It's totally insane to argue that someone hit someone else 'recklessly,' as in not intentionally and knowingly, and that therefore that assault does not constitute 'use of physical force.'"

The case garnered attention in February when Justice Clarence Thomas broke his decade-long silence on the bench to ask questions demonstrating sympathy toward the two men's argument: "Can you give me—this is a misdemeanor violation," Thomas said. "It suspends a constitutional right. Can you give me another area where a misdemeanor violation suspends a constitutional right?"

Thomas then reiterated that the case referred to "a misdemeanor violation of domestic conduct that results in a lifetime ban on possession of a gun, which, at least as of now, is still a constitutional right."

Referring to those questions, Solnit wrote, "The creep seemed very concerned about the rights of men who beat women."

Thomas authored the dissent to the court's ruling, which Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined in part. The case was decided 6-2.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
We need your help.

Support progressive journalism.

Common Dreams is not your average news site. We don't survive on clicks or advertising dollars. We rely entirely on your support. And without it, our independent progressive journalism simply wouldn’t exist. Every gift of every amount matters.

Join the fight and support our common dreams today.

MSNBC Declines to Voluntarily Recognize Newsroom Union Effort

Organizers said that "we want to support one another and make this an even better place to build a career."

Jessica Corbett, staff writer ·


Sanders Speaks Out Against 'Dangerous' Chorus Pushing for New Cold War With China

"Developing a mutually beneficial relationship with China will not be easy," the senator writes. "But we can do better than a new Cold War."

Brett Wilkins, staff writer ·


Indigenous Women Invite Deb Haaland to See Devastation of Line 3 for Herself

The tar sands project "poses a significant threat to water, Indigenous treaty rights, and worsens the global climate crisis," the group wrote to Biden's Interior Secretary.

Kenny Stancil, staff writer ·


After SCOTUS Upholds ACA, Progressives Set Sights on Medicare for All

Now, said campaigner Michael Lighty, "we can instead go to a system that will actually guarantee healthcare to everybody, which the ACA does not do and cannot do."

Jessica Corbett, staff writer ·


McConnell Makes Clear 'All Republicans Will Oppose' Manchin Voting Rights Compromise

"The idea that Manchin can pass a law to protect the vote with help from the very people it needs protecting from is suspect at best."

Jake Johnson, staff writer ·