Terry Lee Stimmel v. Jefferson B. Sessions
879 F.3d 198
| 6th Cir. | 2018

Background

  • In 1997 Terry Lee Stimmel pleaded no contest to a first-degree misdemeanor domestic-violence offense in Ohio; sentence included mostly suspended jail time and protective conditions.
  • In 2002 Stimmel attempted to buy a firearm but failed the NICS background check; FBI denied his administrative appeal under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) (domestic violence misdemeanants).
  • Stimmel sued, raising (1) a Second Amendment as-applied challenge to § 922(g)(9) and (2) an equal protection challenge to Congress’s refusal to extend a NICS relief program available to some categories but not § 922(g)(9) disqualified persons.
  • The district court dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6), finding the firearm prohibition constitutional and rejecting the equal protection claim; Stimmel appealed.
  • The Sixth Circuit applied its two-step Greeno framework, assumed without deciding that § 922(g)(9) may implicate Second Amendment protection, applied intermediate scrutiny, and upheld § 922(g)(9) as substantially related to preventing domestic gun violence; it also affirmed dismissal of the equal protection claim.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether § 922(g)(9) infringes Second Amendment rights as applied to Stimmel Stimmel: a single, decades-old misdemeanor conviction does not justify a near‑permanent bar to firearm possession; strict scrutiny needed Government: statute targets a group historically subject to disqualification or, at minimum, is justified under intermediate scrutiny because disarming misdemeanant domestic abusers furthers preventing gun/domestic violence Court: assumed Second Amendment coverage for step two; applied intermediate scrutiny and held § 922(g)(9) is constitutional (survives intermediate scrutiny)
Whether the government’s evidence shows a reasonable fit between § 922(g)(9) and preventing domestic gun violence Stimmel: government failed to show continued heightened risk (especially long after conviction); lifetime ban is overbroad Government: cites recidivism studies, epidemiological and medical evidence showing domestic abusers pose ongoing risk and firearms greatly increase lethality; categorical prophylaxis is reasonable Court: government produced sufficient evidence of risk and lethality; reasonable fit exists despite some over-inclusiveness
Whether Stimmel is entitled to individualized process to show he is no longer dangerous Stimmel: requests ability to prove low present risk Government: Congress provided relief routes (set-aside, pardon, expungement, restoration); individualized hearings are not required Court: rejected need for individualized judicial hearing; congressional relief mechanisms suffice (and § 925(c) is unfunded)
Whether limiting NICS relief programs to certain disqualified classes violates equal protection Stimmel: exclusion from NICS relief program (targeted to § 922(g)(4) categories) is unequal Government: those disqualified under § 922(g)(4) (mental health adjudications/commitments) are not similarly situated to voluntary criminal offenders; congressional distinctions rational Court: Stimmel not similarly situated to § 922(g)(4) class; equal protection claim fails

Key Cases Cited

  • District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (Second Amendment protects individual right but is not unlimited)
  • United States v. Hayes, 555 U.S. 415 (2009) (Congress added § 922(g)(9) to close loophole for domestic violence misdemeanants)
  • United States v. Greeno, 679 F.3d 510 (6th Cir. 2012) (two-step test for Second Amendment challenges)
  • Tyler v. Hillsdale Cty. Sheriff's Dep't, 837 F.3d 678 (6th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (intermediate scrutiny appropriate for similar § 922(g) challenges; guidance on fit and permanency)
  • United States v. Skoien, 614 F.3d 638 (7th Cir. 2010) (upholding § 922(g)(9) and endorsing categorical prophylactic disqualification)
  • United States v. Chovan, 735 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir. 2013) (upholding § 922(g)(9) under intermediate scrutiny)
  • United States v. Booker, 644 F.3d 12 (1st Cir. 2011) (upholding § 922(g)(9) and noting lethality of firearms in domestic violence)
  • United States v. Staten, 666 F.3d 154 (4th Cir. 2011) (upholding § 922(g)(9))
  • United States v. White, 593 F.3d 1199 (11th Cir. 2010) (held § 922(g)(9) fit within Heller’s list of presumptively lawful prohibitions)
  • United States v. Carey, 602 F.3d 738 (6th Cir. 2010) (upholding felon-in-possession restriction)
  • United States v. Castleman, 134 S. Ct. 1405 (2014) (domestic violence often escalates and presence of firearm increases likelihood of homicide)
Read the full case