The Supreme Courts decision Friday to uphold a 30-year-old law barring domestic abusers from possessing guns came as no surprise. Conservative and liberal justices alike seemed pointedly skeptical and at times openly derisive of Zackey Rahimis defense at oral arguments last year.

Its easy to see why. Texas prosecutors accuse Rahimi of shooting guns in public at least six times while under a protective order he received for allegedly assaulting and shooting at his former partner, the mother of his child. He allegedly fired at another woman in a parking lot , at two different people in separate road rage incidents, and into someones home over comments made on social media. The government could hardly ask for a better symbol for the need to restrict access to firearms in the name of public safety.

But the Rahimi decision has implications that go beyond a single defendant or a single law.