Constitutional Law Reporter
Award
Menu
  • Home
  • US Constitution
  • Supreme Court Cases
  • Justices
    • Chief Supreme Court Justices
    • Current Supreme Court Justices
    • Past US Supreme Court Justices
  • American Biographies
    • General
    • Presidents
    • Vice-Presidents
  • Articles
    • Current Cases
    • Historical Cases
    • Impeachment
  • Videos
  • Links
Hot-Topics

March 6, 2023 | U.S. Supreme Court Takes on Big Tech

What’s on Deck: Supreme Court Adds Gun Rights Case to the Docket

With all of the controversial issues before the U.S. Supreme Court this term, gun rights were noticeably absent. Not anymore — the justices recently agreed to consider eight new cases, one of which is United States v. Castleman.

The case challenges the reach of a federal law that bans gun possession for individuals convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. The statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), specifically prohibits the purchase, possession, or transportation of guns and ammunition by people convicted of “a misdemeanor crime of violence,” which is defined to include any offense that:

  • is a misdemeanor under Federal, State, or Tribal law; and
  • has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon, committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian, or by a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim[.]

In 2001, James Alvin Castleman pleaded guilty to one count of misdemeanor domestic assault in violation of Tennessee Code § 39-13-111(b). That statute makes a defendant liable for a misdemeanor if he commits an assault against a domestic abuse victim. Several years later, federal agents discovered that Castleman and his wife were buying firearms from dealers and selling them on the black market. He was subsequently indicted for possession of a firearm after being “convicted . . . of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence,” in addition to other charges.

The district court later dismissed the gun charges, finding that Castleman’s misdemeanor domestic assault conviction did not qualify as a domestic violence crime requiring the “use or attempted use of physical force” as defined under the federal statute. On appeal, the Sixth Circuit agreed that “violent” force isn’t required for a conviction under the Tennessee law.

“Castleman may have been convicted for causing a minor injury such as a paper cut or a stubbed toe,” the appeals court said. The decision represents a split from other circuits that have held that a domestic assault conviction resulting from “subtle and indirect uses of physical force” still allows for  liability under the federal gun ban.

While the case involves a nuanced interpretation of a federal statute, its implications on the larger gun rights debate are significant. The Obama Administration maintains that the Sixth Circuit’s interpretation of the law would invalidate bans throughout the United States, which are based on similar domestic violence laws.

Previous Articles

U.S. Supreme Court Takes on Big Tech
by DONALD SCARINCI on March 6, 2023

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two big cases involving Big Tech this week. The case...

Read More
SCOTUS to Clarify Standard for Determining Whether True Threat Exception Applies
by DONALD SCARINCI on February 27, 2023

The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Counterman v. Colorado, which involves the st...

Read More
SCOTUS to Take on Religious Rights in the Workplace
by DONALD SCARINCI on February 21, 2023

The U.S. Supreme Court has added another high-profile case to its docket, agreeing to address the r...

Read More
All Posts

The Amendments

  • Amendment1
    • Establishment ClauseFree Exercise Clause
    • Freedom of Speech
    • Freedoms of Press
    • Freedom of Assembly, and Petitition
    Read More
  • Amendment2
    • The Right to Bear Arms
    Read More
  • Amendment4
    • Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
    Read More
  • Amendment5
    • Due Process
    • Eminent Domain
    • Rights of Criminal Defendants
    Read More

Preamble to the Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

Read More

More Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court Holds Debts Incurred by Fraud Are Ineligible for Bankruptcy Relief
  • NJ Supreme Court Rules Campus Police Officer Eligible for Arbitration
  • Lorem ipsum
  • Ketanji Brown Jackson to Join SCOTUS as First Black Female Justice

Constitutional Law Reporter Twitter

A Twitter List by S_H_Law

Constitutional Law Reporter RSS

donald scarinci constitutional law attorney

Editor

Donald Scarinci

Managing Partner

Scarinci Hollenbeck

(201) 806-3364

Awards

con law awards

Follow me

© 2018 Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC. All rights reserved.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Attorney Advertising