United States v. Rahimi

Zackey Rahimi (defendant) was involved in several shootings in Texas. Police officers searched Rahimi’s home and found several firearms, which Rahimi admitted to possessing. He also admitted that he was subject to a protective order based on a prior alleged assault of an ex-girlfriend. That order was civil in nature, not criminal. The federal government charged Rahimi with possessing a firearm while under a domestic-violence restraining order in violation of federal law. In the district court, Rahimi sought to dismiss the charges on the grounds that the federal statute was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. Based on then-existing precedent of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, the circuit in which the Texas district court sat, the court denied Rahimi’s motion. Rahimi then pled guilty but reserved the right to appeal based on his constitutional argument. Rahimi unsuccessfully appealed to the Fifth Circuit. Rahimi then sought an en banc review of that initial decision. While that request was pending, the Supreme Court issued a decision concerning the Second Amendment in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated v. Bruen. Bruen articulated a new, heightened standard for courts considering Second Amendment challenges to statutes. The Fifth Circuit panel sought additional briefing to consider the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bruen. The government made two arguments: (1) that Rahimi was not covered by the Second Amendment under Bruen because he was not an ordinary, law-abiding citizen as required under caselaw that predated Bruen and (2) that even if Rahimi was protected, the statute was constitutional even under Bruen’s new, heightened standard.