The Supreme Court said Friday it will consider whether a 30-year-old federal law that prohibits people under domestic violence restraining orders from possessing guns violates the Second Amendment, taking up a case that will test the high court’s new standard for determining whether firearm restrictions pass constitutional muster. …

After its additional review, the 5th Circuit reversed course and held that the 1994 gun restriction for people subject to domestic violence restraining orders violated the Second Amendment, as the government failed to meet its burden of showing that the law is “consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

[Hmmm. It only takes four justices to grant cert, and we likely don’t have a vote on how many more may have agreed to hear this case. The court also granted leave for Rahimi to proceed “in forma pauperis,” which means the appellant won’t bear court costs for the review. If I were a betting man, I’d bet that the court took this case not to invalidate the ban but to reinstate it. We’ll see, but if six justices wanted this result to stand from Bruen, they wouldn’t have granted cert in this case. — Ed]