By San Diego City Attorney Mara Elliott
The Supreme Court did the right by domestic violence victims. The court’s 8-1 ruling overturned the appellate court decision in the United States vs. Rahimi case which erroneously determined a felon’s right to possess a gun outweighed a victim’s right to safety and even life.
This landmark ruling protects Gun Violence Restraining Orders (GVROs) in the states that have them and paves the way for additional states to adopt them. We passed red flag and other related laws here in California ten years ago. And in the decade since thousands of lives have been saved.
GVROs, allow law enforcement, family members, and sometimes even coworkers or educators to petition a court to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed to be a threat to themselves or others. This proactive approach targets those in crisis or with a history of violence, preventing potential tragedies before they occur.
Gun violence is not inevitable. Under our State’s laws we can respond to situations we know are likely to lead to violence: from the just-fired employee to the person struggling to cope with PTSD, to the middle schooler who vows to teach his bullying classmates a lesson. If someone is going through a really hard time, GVROs allow law enforcement to get the guns out of their home so they can then get the help they need to get better. GRVOs have no impact on responsible gun owners.
California’s approach to gun violence, particularly through GVROs, can serve as a compelling model for the rest of the nation. Over the past decade, our state’s gun violence death rate has consistently been about 43 percent lower than the national average. If the entire country had matched California’s gun violence rate, an estimated 140,000 lives could have been spared over the last ten years. Numbers don’t lie – GRVOs reduce gun violence and save lives.
The Supreme Court’s latest decision could be an important turning point in the national conversation about gun violence. It marks one of the most consequential reversals of gun proliferation policies in recent history, signaling a shift towards prioritizing public safety over unrestricted gun access. By upholding the rights of states to enact protective measures for domestic violence victims, it can open the door to other common-sense gun laws aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people while protecting the rights of law-abiding, responsible gun owners.
Disarming domestic violence abusers is a critical step in this direction. Statistics show that the presence of a firearm in a domestic violence situation increases the risk of homicide by 500 percent. By removing guns from individuals with a history of domestic violence, elected leaders and law enforcement can continue to do their jobs to significantly reduce the incidence of fatal encounters and protect vulnerable individuals from harm.
State-based solutions to gun violence offer a pragmatic and effective approach to addressing this pervasive issue. While federal legislation has been mired in gridlock and intense partisan debate, several states have acted swiftly and decisively to implement policies that reflect the needs and values of their communities. The success of California’s GVROs serves as a testament to the potential of state-level interventions to make a real difference in reducing gun violence and saving lives.
The Supreme Court’s decision is a rare but vital beacon of hope in a landscape often marred by tragic headlines and senseless loss. This is not just good news for states like California that already have these laws in place, but for every American who stands to benefit from a safer, more sensible approach to gun regulation. We have an urgent need to protect domestic violence victims from gun violence. Now, it is up to the states to seize this opportunity and implement GVROs to safeguard their citizens.
While it is too late to bring back the lives lost due to the lack of effective gun control measures over the past decade, this decision represents a hopeful opportunity to prevent future tragedies. By embracing the lessons learned from California and advocating for the widespread adoption of GVROs, we can honor the memory of those lost by ensuring that their deaths were not in vain.
