Rahimi On Remand

On September 12, the Fifth Circuit issued a decision in the case of United States v. Rahimi, following a remand from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court clarified its Bruen test, ruling that § 922(g)(8) is facially constitutional. This ruling indicates a modification of the Bruen test, emphasizing that lower courts should not speculate on potential changes to Supreme Court precedents. The Fifth Circuit's adherence to the Bruen decision was highlighted by Judge Ho, who noted that the Supreme Court has the authority to amend its own precedents as it sees fit. The ruling also raised questions about the procedural requirements for criminal defendants seeking to challenge indictments. Judge Ho pointed out the necessity for defendants to bring facial challenges to statutes, referencing past cases like United States v. Lopez. The implications of this ruling suggest that the constitutional right to bear arms is treated equally to other rights under the Bill of Rights, as reiterated by the Court. Despite the Supreme Court's decision, there remains a concern regarding the ability of defendants like Rahimi to raise specific claims in future proceedings. The decision did not address the arguments presented by various amici curiae, which included judges, scholars, and practitioners who expressed concerns about the implications of allowing individuals with dangerous backgrounds to possess firearms. Justice Thomas was noted for his strong stance in favor of the Second Amendment, even in cases involving individuals deemed dangerous. This case underscores the ongoing debate surrounding gun rights and the balance between individual liberties and public safety.