Supreme Court Seems Likely to Disarm Domestic Abusers

 

During the argument of a case raising the issue of whether a domestic abuser has a constitutional right to possess a gun, Justice Amy Coney Barrett is recorded as saying,“I’m so confused.“ No wonder. It’s because she and her conservative colleagues recently, in the Bruen case, created an absurd test for determining whether a law regulating the carrying of a gun violates the Second Amendment. Legislators and judges, in weighing whether such a law is constitutional, must now do historical research to  uncover similar laws adopted in the 1700s or 1800s. Should none be found, as is virtually true in every instance, the new law, however reasonable or necessary, must be struck down.
In the wake of continuous mass shootings the justices now seem to be searching for way out of the untenable situation they have created without abandoning the unworkable test they have adopted. Apparently, the Court is ready to carve out an exception for persons deemed to be “dangerous”. That is not a useful resolution and will only add to the confusion. The Court should acknowledge its error and formulate a rational test for implementing the Second Amendment.