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

Can Health Care Policy Take a Page from Recent Bipartisan Efforts?

Originally broadcast on May 2, 2024 In the wake of recent bipartisan policy wins in…

2 days ago

An Environmental Psychiatrist Explains Earth Anxiety As We Celebrate Earth Day

As we mark Earth Day, we have just experienced the hottest March on record. But…

2 weeks ago

Why NIH’s Dr. Collins Accompanies Opera’s Renee Fleming in Highlighting Music & Mind’s Power

What happens when music therapists and neuroscientists team up? Patients win, says Dr. Francis Collins.…

2 weeks ago

Opera Superstar Renée Fleming & Experts Reveal How Music Can Make Us Healthier in New Book

Originally published April 9, 2024 She’s received worldwide praise for singing at the Super Bowl,…

4 weeks ago

Reporters’ Roundtable: Why Health Care Will Impact the Election—But to Whose Advantage?

Originally published April 4, 2024 It’s about seven months to election day and our regular…

1 month ago

Expanded Coverage of Weight Loss Drugs? Diabetes Advocates Say Yes

Originally published March 28, 2024 Medicare just announced that it will pay for weight loss…

1 month ago