Rahimi challenged the federal prohibition on firearm possession by a person subject to a qualifying domestic-violence restraining order. The Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8) is constitutional as applied when a court has found that the person poses a credible threat to another’s physical safety. Historical surety and going-armed laws established a tradition of temporarily disarming individuals found to threaten physical harm. The Second Amendment requires a relevant historical analogue, not a historical twin or identical modern regulation. The Fifth Circuit’s facial invalidation of the statute was reversed and the case remanded.