Domestic violence survivors, victims and advocates won a victory today when the Supreme Court, in a 6-2 opinion delivered by Justice Kagan, upheld a federal law banning perpetrators of domestic violence from owning firearms.  The court ruled that reckless acts of domestic violence, in addition to intentional acts, are considered misdemeanor crimes that warrant restriction of gun ownership.

The defendants in two cases brought to the Supreme Court were arguing that reckless acts of domestic violence should not be treated with the same gravity as intentional acts.  The Court disagreed.  Given what we know about the dangerous combination of gun ownership and domestic violence, this ruling is a victory for victims, advocates and stakeholders in the battle against domestic and intimate partner violence.  The inclusion of a question regarding firearms in the Lethality Assessment Program now utilized by many jurisdictions to predict risk of death for domestic violence victims is an important indicator of the increase in dangerousness when a weapon is present.

While one reporter stated that the case “was not one of the more important cases of the term,” those whose lives are impacted by DV and IPV would surely disagree.  This law will surely save lives as we move forward.  The evidence for this is simple and takes many forms:

  1. Between 1990-2005 firearms were used to kill more then two-thirds of domestic homicide victims
  2. A victim of domestic violence is five times more likely to be killed if her abuser owns a firearm
  3. Domestic assaults involving a firearm are twelve times more likely to result in death than assaults with other weapons or bodily force

Similar statistics are in abundance, and today the Court took a huge step in ensuring that these numbers decrease in the coming months and years.  This comes on the heels of a significant local victory, in which Governor Malloy signed a bill that will protect domestic violence victims by prohibiting ownership of a firearm by anyone who is the subject of a temporary restraining order.

These advances afford hope and new protections  to victims, survivors, and advocates. Yet as evidenced by the assertion of one reporter that this case was somehow less important than others before the Court, there is still much work to be done.  So with this victory – we forge ahead!

Kimberly Citron, Director of Domestic Violence, Research and Education

1v0u4l5q6w

Share
Published by
1v0u4l5q6w

Recent Posts

Former Republican HHS Secretary Offers Bipartisan Wisdom

Dr. Louis Sullivan walked the halls of Congress and testified before committees when he was…

4 days ago

Egg Prices Up: Hear From Experts About Why

Originally broadcast February 13, 2025 $4.95 — that’s the record high price of a dozen…

2 weeks ago

Guardrails for Health AI: How, Why and When

Originally broadcast February 6, 2025 Artificial intelligence is revolutionizing health care—but how do we ensure…

2 weeks ago

Do Your 2025 Healthcare Predictions Match Up With What an Expert Says?

Originally broadcast January 30, 2025. Noted healthcare leader Dr. Sachin Jain has been publicly releasing…

4 weeks ago

Health Care & President Trump: What’s Happened So Far

Originally broadcast January 23, 2025 President Trump’s first days in office have resulted in a…

1 month ago

NEJM’s 1st AI Editor on Tech’s Pluses & Minuses

Originally broadcast August 22, 2023 As the year begins, some patients remain concerned about how…

1 month ago