Anyone who wants a solid understanding of the effect Supreme Court decisions have once they descend upon lowly individuals like me, wants to read SCOTUSblog.
Today the blog gave us what they called a “plain English” summary of the eight cases yet to be decided by SCOTUS during this term.
Of course, each is important. And then I got to this one, which is more than important. It is potentially life-saving:
Voisine v. United States (argued February 29, 2016). Stephen Voisine and William Armstrong, the other petitioner in this case, both pleaded guilty in state court to misdemeanor assaults on their respective domestic partners. Several years later, each man was charged with violating a federal law that prohibits the possession of firearms and ammunition by individuals who have previously been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. Voisine and Armstrong contend their state convictions do not automatically qualify as misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence because the state-law provisions can be violated by conduct that is merely reckless, rather than intentional. [My utterly unnecessary bolding]
Here’s the summary and link to the recent New York Times article connecting episodes of mass violence to domestic abuse:
Research by social scientists reveals striking parallels between what drives the two violent phenomena.
I wonder whether the Supreme Justices will factor Orlando and the above Times article into their decision on Voisine v. United States. I hope they do. I trust they will.