The Supreme Court of the United States is set to hear a case that could have significant implications for both intimate partner violence (IPV) and gun violence. The case, United States v. Rahimi, will challenge the constitutionality of a federal law that prohibits individuals subject to a domestic violence protection order from possessing firearms. This law has been in effect for nearly 30 years and has been proven to reduce domestic homicides. However, the Court's decision in this case could potentially impact almost every type of gun control law.

The crux of the issue lies in the Court's recent jurisprudence, known as "originalism," which requires a historical analogy from the time of the Constitution's framing to uphold the constitutionality of laws regulating firearm possession. This departure from traditional constitutional jurisprudence has led to uncertainty regarding the validity of existing gun control laws.

The case involves Zackey Rahimi, who was granted a protective order after assaulting his girlfriend and threatening to shoot her. Rahimi's argument rests on the claim that he had not been convicted of a crime at the time, thus his Second Amendment rights were violated without due process.

The Supreme Court's decision in this case will have far-reaching implications for the ongoing crises of intimate partner violence and gun violence in the United States. It remains to be seen how the Court will interpret and apply its originalist approach in this key case.