Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) is urging the Supreme Court to uphold a federal law that blocks people under domestic violence restraining orders from owning firearms.

The Golden State governor filed an amicus brief on Monday in a case to be argued later this year known as United States v. Rahimi after the Biden administration appealed a 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that held a federal "red flag" statute against domestic violence offenders was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

UP FOR DEBATE: TRUMP, DESANTIS, AND 2024 GOP HOPEFULS' STANCE ON ELECTIONS

“It’s simple: Domestic abusers shouldn’t have guns, and America’s gun safety laws are supported by the Constitution and long-standing historical tradition," Newsom said in a statement the following day. "The Second Amendment is not a suicide pact. The Supreme Court must reverse the lower court’s decision.”

Newsom argued in the amicus brief that the 5th Circuit used "erroneous reasoning" in attempting to interpret and apply last year's landmark decision New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, which held that "history and tradition" determine whether laws regulating firearms are constitutional.

"Bruen instructed that when invoking historical statutes, the government need identify only a “historical analogue, not a historical twin," according to Newsom's brief, which added that multiple "courts have either ignored this instruction or expressed confusion as to what that more nuanced approach entails."

The Bruen case resulted in more than a dozen gun laws being overturned. The 6-3 decision, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, struck down New York's long-standing and restrictive concealed carry permit regime, though the decision had sweeping ramifications on gun regulations across the nation.

The 5th Circuit ruling centers on criminal defendant Zackey Rahimi, who was charged with violating 18 U.S. Code § 922 after police executed a search warrant on his home following repeated alleged instances of violent abuse of a firearm. When officers searched his home, they discovered he was subject to a domestic violence restraining order, and the federal statute criminalizes those who possess a gun under such an order.

While Rahimi won't be off the hook for charges like aggravated assault, his attorneys are seeking to void one charge under the 1994 statute at the Supreme Court, which would have sweeping implications across the country.

Newsom's filing joins a chorus of briefs from pro-gun control groups that have urged the Supreme Court not to uphold the lower court decision.

The Global Action on Gun Violence also filed an amicus brief on Monday calling on the high court to preserve the federal statute at issue in Rahimi and also reverse its prior gun decisions in Bruen and District of Columbia v. Heller, a landmark ruling in 2008 that held local restrictions on owning a firearm in one's own home were unconstitutional.

Conversely, pro-gun groups such as Gun Owners of America want the high court to uphold the 5th Circuit decision, saying the statute in question "disarms" people who haven't been convicted of a crime.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

"If someone is dangerous enough that society can’t trust them with a gun, they should be behind bars — it's that simple," Erich Pratt, senior vice president of GOA, told Business Insider last month. "But this law disarms nonviolent people who have never been convicted of a crime."

The high court will hear arguments in the case this fall, with a decision likely around June of next year.