Should the Court grant the petition, vacate the judgment of the court of appeals, and remand for further consideration in light of the potential granting of a writ in Duarte or any other similar case?

Mr. Havins was convicted by a jury of being a person in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). On appeal to the Ninth Circuit , he argued his conviction was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The Ninth Circuit in an unpublished decision of September 19, 2025, rejected his appeal, citing United States v. Duarte , 137 F. 4th 743 (9th Cir. 2025) (en banc). Duarte ’s petition for a writ of certiorari is currently pending before this Court , 25-425. In the meantime, other circuit courts of appeals have been resolving similar constitutional challenges to subsections of Section 922(g). See, e.g., Range v. Attorney General , 69 F.4th 96 (3d Cir. 2023) (en banc). Through the end of the past Term, various parties sought certiorari from this Court on these questions. Last year, t his Court recently issued its decision in United States v. Rahimi , 144 S. Ct. 1889 (2024), involving a Second Amendment challenge to Section 922(g)(8)(C)(i). The Court then granted seven certiorari petitions raising challenges to subsections of Section 922(g), vacated the court of appeals’ decisions, and remanded for further consideration in light of Rahimi . See, e.g., Garland v. Range , No. 23 -374, 2024 WL 3259661 (U.S. July 2, 2024). The question presented is: Should the Court grant the petition, vacate the judgment of the court of appeals, and remand for further consideration in light of the potential granting of a writ in Duarte or any other similar case?