Rahimi and the Second Amendment: How The Supreme Court Swatted Down Hunter Biden’s Hail Mary Pass
June 22, 20241/2
Below is my column on Fox.com on the ruling in United States v. Rahimi and its implications for the Hunter Biden appeal. The hope for a final pass to the Court ended with an 8-1 decision against the challenge to the federal gun law.
Here is the column:
On Friday, Hunter Biden may have lost the greatest Hail Mary pass in history.When Cowboys quarterback Roger Staubach threw his famous winning touchdown pass to wide receiver Drew Pearson in 1975, he later explained “I closed my eyes and said a Hail Mary.” For Hunter, the pass to the Supreme Court roughly 50 years later just missed in equally spectacular fashion.
Hunter and his legal team were counting on the Court striking down the federal gun law at issue in the case of United States v. Rahimi. Hunter was just convicted by a unanimous jury in Delaware for false statements on a gun form and possession of a firearm as a drug addict.He has been arguing against the position of his father’s administration and adopting the same argument of the National Rifle Association (NRA) in challenging the constitutionality of the law.
The Supreme Court just voted 8-1 that the law is indeed constitutional and that a court can temporarily deprive citizens of the right to possess weapons for the protection of others. The sole dissenter was Justice Clarence Thomas.
The case involved Zackey Rahimi, a drug dealer who was under a restraining order after a 2019 argument with his girlfriend (called C.M. in the opinion) who had a child with him. Rahimi allegedly knocked C.M. down, dragged her to a car, and then (as C.M. fled) shot at either C.M. or a bystander. He was also accused of threatening to shoot her if she went to the cops.
The Texas trial court found that Rahimi was not only engaged in “family violence” but that additional violence was “likely to occur again in the future.”
Under the protective order, Rahimi’s gun license was suspended for two years and he was barred from contacting C.M. for that period. Under the order, his gun rights would be suspended for either one or two years after his release date, depending on any imprisonment.
However, Rahimi was not done yet. He later violated the order by approaching C. M. and communicated with her by social media. Months later, Rahimi threatened a different woman with a gun and was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Finally, a police officer later identified him as the suspect in a spate of at least five additional shootings.
That was not exactly a poster child for lawful gun owners and the Court failed to see the suspension of his gun rights as an unconstitutional deprivation.
Since the Court first recognized the Second Amendment as an individual right in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), it has stated that this is not an absolute right. There are no truly absolute rights in the Constitution.
https://jonathanturley.org/2024/06/22/rahimi-and-the-second-amendment-how-the-supreme-court-intercepts-hunter-bidens-hail-mary-pass/