Examining the Lautenberg Amendment in the civilian and military contexts: congressional overreaching, statutory vagueness, ex post facto violations, and implementational flaws.(domestic violence gun control law)

INTRODUCTION

Imagine a court reducing a domestic violence felony to a misdemeanor because the judge does not want to give a "noncriminal" (1) male a felony conviction merely for attacking his wife. (2) Imagine further that as a result of this judicial reluctance, the court sentences the defendant to serve his time only on weekends. The defendant is then released. Subsequently, he goes home and attacks his wife again. This time he attacks her with a gun. This time he kills her. Now imagine this man is a police officer or soldier who has sworn an oath to protect you, (3) or perhaps a next door neighbor, or a stranger you pass on the street.

When Congress passed the Lautenberg Amendment (4) to the Gun Control Act of 1968 ("Lautenberg Amendment" or "the Amendment") in September 30, 1996, it was with the express purpose of reducing scenarios like this one, of preventing that police officer, soldier, neighbor, or stranger from committing gun-related domestic violence. (5)

The Lautenberg Amendment states that:

 
   it shall be unlawful for any person ... who has been convicted in any court 
   of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, to ship or transport in 
   interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any 
   firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has 
   been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce. (6)