Thomas was the lone justice who ruled against a federal law prohibiting those under a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a gun.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is once again facing heat after the conservative jurist on Friday was the lone dissenter in the High Court’s ruling in a landmark gun rights case.
Eight of the nine justices on the bench agreed in United States v. Rahimi to uphold a federal statute that bars individuals who are under a domestic violence restraining order from obtaining a firearm. The decision limited the scope of the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, which broadly expanded Second Amendment rights.
Thomas, who wrote the opinion in Bruen, opposed his fellow justices on Friday, writing in his dissenting opinion that the federal statute in question in Rahimi violates the «plain text» of the Second Amendment and is not consistent with the «historical tradition of firearm regulation.» The High Court had agreed under Bruen that government regulations regarding gun ownership are only constitutional if there is a tradition of such laws in U.S. history.
«After [Bruen], this Court’s directive was clear: A firearm regulation that falls within the Second Amendment’s plain text is unconstitutional unless it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation», read Thomas’ opinion.
