WASHINGTON (CN) - The Supreme Court took a stand on gun control and women's safety Monday in upholding a firearms ban for convicted domestic abusers.
Felons have long been barred from possessing guns, but many perpetrators of domestic violence are convicted only of misdemeanors. Studies show, however, that the crimes of misdemeanant domestic abusers often escalate in severity over time, and that the presence of a firearm increases the chances of a homicide.
Congress sought to close this loophole in gun-control laws with Section 922(g)(9) of Title 18 - forbidding the ownership of firearm making it a crime for anyone convicted of "a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence."
While the 2014 decision U.S. v. Castleman affirmed application of the ban for intentional assault misdemeanor convictions, the case decided today asked whether reckless assault should count as well.
The court agreed 6-2 this morning that it should.
"A person who assaults another recklessly 'uses' force, no less than one who carries out that same action knowingly or intentionally," Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the majority. "The relevant text thus supports prohibiting petitioners, and others with similar criminal records, from possessing firearms."
William Armstrong and Stephen Voisine, the petitioners behind today's case, each faced federal charges of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, in violation of Section 911(g)(9), after they were convicted under Maine law of abusing women with reckless intent.
Armstrong was found with six firearms in 2010, just two years after his second conviction for assaulting his wife.
Police found Voisine's rifle after he was arrested in 2009 on a federal charge of killing a bald eagle. Voisine had two convictions for assaulting a domestic partner, as well.
After a federal judge refused to dismiss the firearms charges against them, they conditionally pleaded guilty and were sentenced.
The First Circuit affirmed in January, sending the men to the Supreme Court with the question of whether "a misdemeanor crime with the mens rea of recklessness" qualifies as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
Kagan said their convictions were properly affirmed.
"The federal ban on firearms possession applies to any person with a prior misdemeanor conviction for the 'use ... of physical force' against a domestic relation," the 12-page opinion states. "That language, naturally read, encompasses acts of force undertaken recklessly — i.e., with conscious disregard of a substantial risk of harm. And the state-law backdrop to that provision, which included misdemeanor assault statutes covering reckless conduct in a significant majority of jurisdictions, indicates that Congress meant just what it said. Each petitioner's possession of a gun, following a conviction under Maine law for abusing a domestic partner, therefore violates §922(g)(9). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals."
In an unlikely pairing, Justice Sonia Sotomayor joined Justice Clarence Thomas in dissenting.