Affirming Disarmament of Domestic Violence Misdemeanants: Constitutional Validity of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)

Introduction

The Tenth Circuit’s decision in United States v. Jackson (No. 23-6047, 2025) addresses two principal issues: the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) under the Second Amendment and the reasonableness of Barry B. Jackson, Jr.’s sentence. Jackson, a convicted domestic-violence misdemeanant, pleaded guilty to possessing firearms in violation of § 922(g)(9). At sentencing, the district court included additional weapons Jackson possessed at arrest as relevant conduct and calculated a Guidelines range reflecting five firearms, one with a large-capacity magazine. On appeal, Jackson challenged (1) the facial constitutionality of § 922(g)(9) and (2) the procedural and substantive reasonableness of his sentence.

Summary of the Judgment

The Tenth Circuit unanimously affirmed. First, applying the two-step test of Bruen (597 U.S. 1, 2022) and guided by Rahimi (602 U.S. 680, 2024), the court held § 922(g)(9) withstands an as-applied Second Amendment challenge. Jackson’s status as a domestic-violence misdemeanant placed him within the historical tradition of disarming those who pose a credible threat to another’s safety. Second, the court found no error in the district court’s relevant-conduct determination under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3. Jackson’s possession of three additional firearms at arrest fell within the same course of conduct and supported a within-Guidelines sentence of 72 months.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

• District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008): Established an individual right to bear arms, subject to historical limitations.
• McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010): Incorporated the Second Amendment against the states.
• New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022): Mandated a text-and-history test for firearm regulations.
• United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024): Upheld § 922(g)(8) via analogies to surety and “going armed” laws and articulated the “relevantly similar” standard.
• United States v. Rogers, 371 F.3d 1225 (10th Cir. 2004): Recognized domestic-violence misdemeanants pose a substantial risk and justified disarmament under §§ 922(g)(8) & (g)(9).
• Tenth Circuit Sentencing Guidelines cases (e.g., United States v. Garcia, 946 F.3d 1191 (2020)): Defined “same course of conduct” relevant-conduct analysis.

Legal Reasoning

The court applied the Bruen framework:

1. Textual Scope: Jackson, as “the people,” sought to keep common-use arms (handguns) for self-defense. The Second Amendment prima facie covers his conduct.
2. Historical Justification: The government showed § 922(g)(9) is “relevantly similar” to founding-era laws that prevented those who posed a credible threat from bearing arms:
   • Surety Laws: Required bonds from individuals accused of domestic violence to secure public safety.
   • “Going Armed” Laws: Disarmed persons who threatened or terrified others with weapons.
   Jackson’s convictions for two separate domestic-violence misdemeanors triggered disarmament under the same principle: preventing those with demonstrated propensities for violence from accessing firearms.

Having found the statute’s application to Jackson consistent with historical tradition, the court rejected both his facial and implied as-applied challenges.

Impact

• Clarifies that § 922(g)(9) survives Bruen’s test when applied to domestic-violence misdemeanants who pose credible threats.
• Endorses the use of broad historical analogies rather than requiring precise “historical twins.”
• Reaffirms the “same course of conduct” approach to relevant conduct under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3, even when uncharged firearm possessions occur months apart.
• Limits future Second Amendment challenges by emphasizing the principle of disarming those who demonstrate a propensity for violence, irrespective of felony/misdemeanor labels.

Complex Concepts Simplified

• § 922(g)(9): Federal ban on firearm possession by anyone convicted of a domestic-violence misdemeanor, lifted only if the conviction is expunged or pardoned with firearm rights restored.
• Bruen two-step test:
  1. Does the Second Amendment’s text cover the individual’s conduct?
  2. If yes, is the regulation consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation?
• Relevant Conduct (U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3): Uncharged offense behavior may influence sentencing if it forms part of the “same course of conduct” or common scheme.
• Facial vs. As-Applied Challenges: A facial challenge attacks a statute’s validity in all applications; an as-applied challenge contests its constitutionality in a specific context or individual’s case.

Conclusion

United States v. Jackson solidifies the principle that Congress may disarm domestic-violence misdemeanants under § 922(g)(9) consistent with the Second Amendment. By applying Bruen’s text-and-history test and upholding a within-Guidelines sentence based on relevant conduct, the Tenth Circuit reinforced both the historical justification for such disarmament and the established rules governing federal sentencing. This decision will guide lower courts in resolving future challenges to firearm restrictions on individuals with demonstrated propensities for violence.