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

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 day 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 week ago

Healthcare Providers & ChatGPT Will See You Now: Our Brave New World

Originally broadcast June 8, 2023 The World Health Organization has issued a statement expressing concern…

1 week ago

2024 Rewind & Look Ahead for Health Care Issues

Originally broadcast January 2, 2025. Conversations on Health Care hopes the new year is off…

3 weeks ago

Holidays, Headaches & Heartache: Best Advice from the “Happiness Doctor”

Originally broadcast December 26, 2024 Dr. Amit Sood is called the “Happiness Doctor” for a…

4 weeks ago

What Elon Musk & Peter Thiel Invest In to Make Lives Longer

Originally broadcast December 20, 2024 Billionaires who dream of extending human life, including Elon Musk,…

1 month ago