Federal judge in Ky. rules gun ban for people with domestic violence orders is unconstitutional

A federal judge in Lexington has issued an opinion holding that a federal law prohibiting people from having guns if they have a domestic violence order against them is unconstitutional.

The case is one of a series of cases making their way through the federal court system in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year that expanded gun rights.

In an order filed in the Eastern District of Kentucky Feb. 2, Chief U.S. District Judge Danny Reeves dismissed a federal charge against a Harrison County man, Sherman Combs, who had been in possession of a handgun while he was under a domestic violence order.

Combs is still facing a second federal charge that accuses him of lying to the firearms dealer about whether he had a DVO when he bought the gun in Georgetown three days after the order was issued.

The decision to dismiss the charge against Combs was based on the 2022 Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, in which the Supreme Court struck down a New York law that had required citizens to show a special need to carry weapons in public.

The ruling changed the way courts evaluate the legality of restrictions on gun possession.

In deciding that case, the Supreme Court found that when courts are evaluating challenges to gun laws, they must ask first whether the conduct being regulated is covered by the text of the Second Amendment, which guarantees the right to bear arms. If it is, they must then consider whether the regulation aligns with the nation’s historical tradition of regulating firearms.

In dismissing the possession charge against Combs, Reeves found that he had not been shown a “comparable historical analogue” to the law prohibiting gun possession by those with a domestic violence order against them.

Combs’ attorney, Thomas Lyons, said that though Combs was “pleased with the dismissal of the charge,” the ruling should not be viewed as “an endorsement for people to have guns when they have a domestic violence order in place.”

“Judge Reeves is obligated by his oath of office to do justice impartially, and to follow the law as pronounced by the Supreme Court,” Lyons said in an email. “This is the essence of the rule of law. I am confident Judge Reeves takes that oath seriously.”

The U.S. Attorney’s Office, which is prosecuting Combs, did not comment on the judge’s order.

U.S. Attorney Carlton Shier IV intends to appeal, according to court documents.

A higher court issued a similar opinion the same day Reeves issued his order.

In that case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which has jurisdiction over Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, also ruled as unconstitutional the law banning people under domestic violence orders from having firearms.

The three judges in that case also cited the Bruen decision, saying the 1994 law’s “ban on possession of firearms is an ‘outlier that our ancestors would never have accepted.’”

Some advocates for victims of domestic violence are concerned about the rulings.

“It is disappointing, especially given the situations we’ve had in Lexington recently around domestic violence and victims being killed using guns,” said Fayette County Attorney Angela Evans. “It’s a disservice to victims. It’s a disservice to the community.”

She said that that knowing that their partner wouldn’t be permitted to have guns is “probably something that was a comfort to people who would file” for a DVO, and she wondered if the rulings would “cause a lot of hesitation” among victims considering filing for an order.

“What has this law prevented from happening? I’m not sure, but I’m concerned that we might find out,” Evans said.

“As someone who works for a domestic violence shelter, we obviously have strong feelings about people with DVOs against them possessing firearms,” said Veronica Christian, a family advocate at GreenHouse 17.

Allowing people who are under domestic violence orders to have guns seems like “giving a dangerous person another way to be dangerous,” she said.

State court documents indicate that Combs’ wife sought and was granted a domestic violence order against Combs, 50, on June 15 in Harrison District Court.

On June 18, according to federal court documents, Combs bought a .357 Magnum revolver in Scott County, representing to the dealer “that he was not subject to a court order restraining him from harassing, stalking or threatening an intimate partner or child of such partner.”

He allegedly texted his partner in violation of the DVO five times on June 25 and 26. When a sheriff’s deputy arrived to arrest him in Cynthiana the following day, Combs had a revolver in a holster on his hip, court documents state.

Though the charge related to Combs’ possession of the gun has been dismissed, he is still facing a federal charge alleging that he lied to the firearms dealer. A pretrial conference is scheduled for Feb. 15.