Here's why some Texas officials are calling for gun confiscations in domestic abuse cases

Texas elected officials and victims advocacy groups are calling on the Legislature to pass gun safety rules that protect victims of violent crimes after a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling affirmed a law that bans people who are subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing firearms.

"When our courts identify that someone is so dangerous and orders them to surrender their firearms, it saves lives," said Nikhita Ved, vice president of community services for Stop Abuse for Everyone, or SAFE. "Our staff know that, and the Supreme Court agreed."

A consortium of local domestic violence prevention organizations alongside city, county and state officials gathered at the state Capitol on Tuesday to tout the high court's United States v. Rahimi ruling as a landmark decision to help protect families and communities from domestic violence and to call on the Legislature to take action in its upcoming session to address a growing trend of domestic violence against women in Texas.

"Over the last decade, the number of firearm holders in Texas has tripled, while the number of women killed by an intimate partner has nearly doubled," said state Rep. Donna Howard, D-Austin, who leads the Texas Women's Health Caucus.

"I am hopeful that the Legislature will continue to support survivors and their families by passing legislation that protects them from gun violence and investing in programs that seek to reduce domestic violence homicides and injuries committed with firearms," she said.

In June, the Supreme Court in an 8-1 decision ruled against a challenge from a Texas man who argued that a federal law banning people who are the subject of a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a firearm is a violation of the Second Amendment.

The high court disagreed and kept the federal law in place, allowing for people who are credibly accused of domestic violence from owning a gun, and opening the door for local and state officials to strengthen firearm surrender protocols.

As the leader of the House Select Committee on Health Care Reform, Howard cited data from the Texas Health and Humans Services Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee that indicates domestic violence is a leading cause of maternal deaths, with 27% of those deaths in 2022 linked to domestic violence.

Additionally, data from the Texas Council on Family Violence shows that instances of domestic violence involving a gun have increased by 82% from 2011 to 2020, Howard said.

"These statistics are heartbreaking reminders of the devastating impact increased access to guns has had on our communities," Howard told the crowd of victims advocates gathered at the Capitol.

Reinforcing a collaborative effort to identify those who are in immediate danger of a domestic violence situation will remain a priority after the high court's decision, said Travis County District Attorney José Garza.

In calling the ruling crucial and compatible with Travis County's mission to reduce instances of domestic violence in intimate partner relationships, Garza said he is proud of a multi-agency effort in partnership with the city of Austin to identify domestic gun violence cases through a "firearms technical assistance project."

"This protocol, will ensure that prosecutors, law enforcement and advocates at each level of our criminal legal system are involved in the crucial task of keeping guns out of high risk situations," Garza said.

Despite celebrating the ruling as a win, advocates acknowledged a number of pressing issues that still need to be tackled, including the development of high risk assessment teams and collaborative efforts to create a framework to better prevent other types of abuse such as strangulation and stalking.

Bronwyn Blake, chief legal officer with the Texas Advocacy Project, said the continuing effect of the high court's decision will be a major reference in future cases that weigh safety concerns and the rights of individuals.

"This decision now sets a precedent for future cases where constitutional rights might intersect with public safety concerns," Blake said. "It also underscored the need for ongoing legal and legislative efforts to ensure that our laws evolve to protect the individual freedoms and community welfare."