Podcasts about bruen

The Supreme Court left lower courts somewhat in the lurch in its recent Bruen decision; last year, in Rahimi, it attempted to clarify matters.  Now an assault weapons case reaches the Court, Snope v. Brown, but the Court declines to hear it.  Nevertheless, Justice Kavanaugh, though agreeing with the denial of cert, writes a commentary which calls for another, unspecified case to be heard in the near future, and he gives an indication of how he might approach it.  We see this as in line with earlier writing he did in Bruen, but there are many unanswered questions in what seems like an intention to utilize a straightforward reasoning.  We raise many of these questions, and in doing so, offer our readers a look back at the path gun cases have taken to get to this point, and a look ahead in the hope that some of these heretofore unresolved issues are given their due; that the Justices "count to ten," before the Court takes what might be too headstrong a path forward.  Lawyers and judges can obtain CLE credit by visiting podcast.njsba.com after listening.

Send us a textFirst, a follow-up from episode 696 about the SCOTUS rejecting a challenge to Maryland's "Assault Weapons" ban, in which Clarence Thomas openly rebukes his fellow justices (Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett, etc.) that voted against granting cert thereto.Then, on to Illinois, where Gov. Prickster is about to sign their latest monstrosity of infringement, a "safe storage" law, that Royce explains is a back door to warrantless 4th Amendment violations.Support the showGiveSendGo | Unconstitutional 2A Prosecution of Tate Adamiak Askari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

Send us a textFirst, Royce excoriates the Supreme Court (Justice Kavanaugh in particular) for their failure to enforce Bruen by ruling on two very important cases regarding "assault" weapons and "large capacity" magazines.Then, a look at the recent terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, in which multiple people were badly burned by a jihadi scumbag, and lessons in situational awareness associated therewith.Tune in and share!Support the showGiveSendGo | Unconstitutional 2A Prosecution of Tate Adamiak Askari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

The Supreme Court's ruling in 2022 changed the established methodology for evaluating Second Amendment cases. What was the existing methodology, and what does this shift signify for future interpretations? We sit down with Joel Alicea, Professor of Law and Director, the Center for the Constitution and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition at the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University of America. We discuss the implication of the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and the new methodology relates to originalist interpretations. He answers questions on how courts define “tradition” when using it as legal reasoning, and the limitations it can pose. Finally, Alicea offers a nuanced perspective on the application of gun rights in America with recognition of America's complicated relationship with firearms. Madison's Notes is the podcast of Princeton University's James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. Contributions to and/or sponsorship of any speaker does not constitute departmental or institutional endorsement of the specific program, speakers or views presented. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Supreme Court's ruling in 2022 changed the established methodology for evaluating Second Amendment cases. What was the existing methodology, and what does this shift signify for future interpretations? We sit down with Joel Alicea, Professor of Law and Director, the Center for the Constitution and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition at the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University of America. We discuss the implication of the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and the new methodology relates to originalist interpretations. He answers questions on how courts define “tradition” when using it as legal reasoning, and the limitations it can pose. Finally, Alicea offers a nuanced perspective on the application of gun rights in America with recognition of America's complicated relationship with firearms. Madison's Notes is the podcast of Princeton University's James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. Contributions to and/or sponsorship of any speaker does not constitute departmental or institutional endorsement of the specific program, speakers or views presented. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Supreme Court's ruling in 2022 changed the established methodology for evaluating Second Amendment cases. What was the existing methodology, and what does this shift signify for future interpretations? We sit down with Joel Alicea, Professor of Law and Director, the Center for the Constitution and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition at the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University of America. We discuss the implication of the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and the new methodology relates to originalist interpretations. He answers questions on how courts define “tradition” when using it as legal reasoning, and the limitations it can pose. Finally, Alicea offers a nuanced perspective on the application of gun rights in America with recognition of America's complicated relationship with firearms. Madison's Notes is the podcast of Princeton University's James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. Contributions to and/or sponsorship of any speaker does not constitute departmental or institutional endorsement of the specific program, speakers or views presented. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Send us a textEver since the NYSRPA vs. Bruen Supreme Court ruling, corrupt, Constitutionally dyslexic lower court judges and many elected officials (Republicans included!) have consistently ignored the 'Text and History' standard set forth therein, and refer to corrupt legal precedents for guidance on 2nd Amendment issues.SHOOTINGCLASSES.COMOnline business operations platform for firearms instructors, trainees, and Shooting RangesGlover Orndorf and Flanagan Wealth Mgmt.Wealth management servicesControl Jiu-Jitsu/MMAJiu-Jitsu/MMA Training in Melbourne, FLFreedom GunsFirearms, Ammunition, Accessories, Training classes The Gun Site9-Lane 25 yard indoor Shooting Range, Gun Store, Training classesWJS GunsGun and Outdoor Shop, ammo, accessories, fishing tackle, moreSicarios Gun ShopFirearms, Accessories, Ammo, Safes, and more!The American Police Hall of FameMuseum and Shooting Center (open to public), Law Enforcement and Civilian TrainingCounter Strike TacticalBest Little Gun Store in Melbourne, Florida! Veteran Owned and Operated 321-499-4949Go2 WeaponsManufacturers of AR platform rifles for military and civilian. Veteran Owned and OperatedEar Care of MelbourneNeed hearing aids? Go to the audiologists that gave Royce his hearing back!Quantified PerformanceQuantified Performance, LLC is focused on building safe, high performing keepers and bearers.Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the showGiveSendGo | Unconstitutional 2A Prosecution of Tate Adamiak Askari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

This Day in Legal History: Army-McCarthy Hearings BeginOn April 22, 1954, the Army-McCarthy hearings began in Washington, D.C., marking a pivotal moment in American legal and political history. The televised proceedings, which stretched over two months, were convened to investigate conflicting accusations between Senator Joseph McCarthy and the U.S. Army. McCarthy claimed the Army was sheltering communists; the Army countered that McCarthy and his chief counsel, Roy Cohn, had improperly pressured military officials to give preferential treatment to a former McCarthy aide.These hearings drew millions of viewers and brought McCarthy's aggressive, often unsubstantiated allegations into public view. Under questioning, McCarthy's bullying tactics and disregard for evidence became increasingly apparent. The most famous moment came when Army counsel Joseph Welch rebuked McCarthy with the now-historic line, “Have you no sense of decency, sir?”—a turning point in the hearings and in public perception of McCarthy.As support for McCarthy dwindled, the hearings exposed the dangers of reckless accusations without due process, a central legal concern during the Red Scare. Later that year, the Senate formally censured McCarthy, effectively ending his political influence. The hearings stand as a cautionary tale about the abuse of investigatory powers and the erosion of civil liberties in times of national fear. They also highlight the essential role of transparency and accountability in American governance. The legacy of the Army-McCarthy hearings continues to inform debates over the balance between national security and individual rights.Alphabet's Google faces a major antitrust trial starting Monday in Washington, as the U.S. Department of Justice and 38 state attorneys general seek to break up its dominance in the search engine market. Central to the government's case is a proposal for Google to sell its Chrome browser and potentially even its Android operating system if competition isn't restored. Prosecutors argue that Google's exclusive agreements, like those paying billions to Apple and other companies to be the default search engine, have harmed rivals, including emerging AI firms like Perplexity AI and OpenAI.Google insists the DOJ's demands are extreme and warns that ending these deals could harm browser makers like Mozilla and raise smartphone costs. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta is presiding over the trial, expected to last three weeks. Google plans to appeal any unfavorable ruling and argues that its deals help fund free, open-source technology. The case follows a separate DOJ victory last week, where a judge found Google maintained an illegal monopoly in ad tech. The trial's outcome could dramatically reshape how Americans access information online and influence future antitrust enforcement, with similar scrutiny already aimed at companies like Meta.Google faces trial in US bid to end search monopoly | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Minnesota's appeal defending its law that barred individuals under 21 from obtaining permits to carry handguns in public. This decision leaves in place a ruling from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found the restriction unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The case is one of many that have challenged age-based and other gun restrictions following the Supreme Court's 2022 Bruen decision, which established that firearm regulations must align with the nation's historical traditions to be valid.Gun rights groups, including the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus and Firearms Policy Coalition, challenged the law, arguing it infringed on the rights of 18- to 20-year-olds. Minnesota defended the law as a modest safety measure, noting that youths already have access to guns under specific conditions, such as hunting or supervision. The 8th Circuit disagreed, saying the state failed to prove that young adults posed a sufficient threat or that the restriction had historical precedent.While more than 30 states have similar age-related laws, Minnesota's could no longer be enforced once the appeals process concluded. The case underscores how courts are interpreting and applying the Bruen test, which has reshaped the legal landscape for gun laws. Although the Supreme Court has upheld some modern firearm restrictions, it has consistently signaled that any such laws must fit within historical frameworks.US Supreme Court won't save Minnesota age restriction on carrying guns | ReutersIn my column for Bloomberg Tax this week, I talk about the risk posed by the Department of Government Efficiency's (DGE) access to taxpayer data. If the federal government wants more access to your tax data, it should have to meet a high bar—proving a clear need, protecting the information, and being transparent about how it's used. Right now, the DGE, spearheaded by Elon Musk, is pushing for expanded access to the IRS's Integrated Data Retrieval System (IDRS), which holds deeply sensitive taxpayer records. The rationale? To root out fraud and streamline federal oversight. But noble intentions aren't a substitute for safeguards—and as it stands, DGE hasn't provided any clear guardrails for how it would handle this data.We've seen how this can go wrong. In Sweden, the national tax agency is now facing a lawsuit for sharing taxpayer data with private companies, including marketers and data brokers. Sweden's commitment to constitutional transparency has been used to justify these disclosures, even as they appear to violate Europe's strict privacy laws. It's a reminder that transparency can be weaponized, and privacy treated as an inconvenience. If that sounds extreme, just imagine your tax return fueling a marketing database in the name of government openness.In the U.S., Section 6103 of the tax code makes unauthorized disclosure of taxpayer data a felony. DGE's quest to tap into the IDRS raises serious questions about whether internal access could amount to disclosure, especially if it increases the risk of leaks, misuse, or political meddling. DGE already has access to some refund-related data, but it's now seeking far more granular insight—without explaining what it will do with it, or how it will prevent abuse.What Sweden's case makes clear is that even the best intentions can lead to disastrous outcomes when privacy is not treated as sacrosanct. The U.S. should take that warning seriously. Taxpayer data is among the most sensitive information the government holds. Expanding access to it—especially by an agency as vaguely defined as DGE—should not happen without a fully transparent, purpose-limited, and accountable framework.Until then, DGE should not be granted access to the IRS's IDRS system or any individualized taxpayer information. The risks are too high, and the protections too flimsy. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Hosts Kelly Roskam, Tim Carey and Kari Still explore how courts are grappling with minimum age firearm regulations in the wake of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. Alex McCourt, JD, PhD, MPH core faculty member at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, joins the show to share public health research on firearm risks among young adults.  Special guest Professor Megan Walsh, JD, a visiting assistant clinical Professor of Law and the Director of the Gun Violence Prevention Law Clinic at the University of Minnesota Law School unpacks the shifting legal landscape in federal courts.    ###  0:00 - Introduction and legal background 4:25 - Alex McCourt discusses the public health evidence behind age-based firearms laws 15:30 - Professor Megan Walsh, JD, shares the shifting legal landscape in federal courts 43:53 - Uncertainty around the law and what comes next

Codex Prime chats with Joseph Bruen, the founder of New England Fan Fest and All Axxess Entertainment in this week's episode! Tune in as they chat about all things wrestling. You can't see me, my time is to GET IT! Recorded March 18, 2025 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Catch Codex Prime on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or other podcast platforms. Email: CodexPrimePodcast@gmail.com SOCIAL MEDIA: Facebook: www.facebook.com/codexprime Instagram: instagram.com/codexprimepodcast/ YouTube: www.youtube.com/channel/UCbDMNJNgnM6y3WB3fA1a1HA SoundCloud: @codex-prime Victor Omoayo - Do the Film Thing Podcast: https://dothefilmthing.podbean.com/ - Do the Film Thing Linktree: https://linktr.ee/dothefilmthing - Email: dothefilmthing@gmail.com Carl Byrd - Instagram, TikTok and Mixcloud @mrbyrd1027

Send us a textFirst, Royce shreds the Constitutionally-illiterate ruling by the 7th Circuit Court of appeals that claimed that short-barreled rifles are not protected by the 2nd Amendment.Not being satisfied with that, he then annihilates the ruling of the 11th Circuit court and their wildly moronic ruling that 18-20-year-olds have no right to purchase guns in Florida, which firmly entrenches the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas Act of 2018.Defensive Pistol Fundamentals | Brevard County, Florida | Royce Productions, IncAdvanced Defensive Pistol | Brevard County, Florida | Royce Productions, IncSupport the showGiveSendGo | Unconstitutional 2A Prosecution of Tate Adamiak Askari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

Riding Shotgun With Charlie #227  Jonathan Goldstein NRA BOD, NRA 2.0 Candidate   This is a small first, but a first nonetheless. Jonathan Goldstein flew up from Philadelphia to Boston just to film a show with me! Yes, I'm beyond honored! He's also working that hard to get elected for the NRA Board of Directors. And in his home state of Pennsylvania for their gun owners. It's always fun to meet someone new and widen my circle of friends. I picked up Jonathan at the airport and we drove for a bit to get to know each other.  We kick things off quickly and jump in deep, talking about Bruen, open carry v concealed, and why some laws aren't conducive to logic. He's got a great line, borrowed from Chris Conte from the NRA ILA, about “New Jersey being the North Korea of gun ownership.” I knew things were going to be fun after that.    Jonathan didn't really grow up as a gun guy. He owned IT businesses and sold them before going to law school. Besides that, he was a newlywed and applied for law school, and was on the ballot for the state legislature. After not liking the big law firm, he got together with some other friends and started outsourcing legal work to India.  But as he says everyone “hates outsourcing, but they hate lawyers more.”    Back in 1994, the gun laws were being redone in the Pa. There were lots of folks against it and he wanted to see what they were against. Each of the towns and cities were supposed to have the same laws. But they decided they were going to have different classes of cities, and thus, Philly was in its own class. Therefore, having its own laws that the rest of the state didn't have. He started thinking about why the politicians were so set against lawful gun ownership. That piqued his interest and that's when he became a gun owner. He got a permit, bought a snub revolver, got into shotguns and bird hunting and found a new passion.    Around the time Heller was going on in 2008, he was getting more involved in getting cases and getting noticed by the NRA. This is where he became friends with Chris Conte at NRA ILA. In 2011, he was awarded the Defender of Justice by NRA ILA. He also helped raise money for the NRA.    On the radar of the NRA, he ends up on a couple committees, one for the legal affairs and one for the non-traditional gun owner, those of racial and sexual minorities. With enough trust, he was placed on the nominating committee. That's when he started seeing that things were not necessarily going so well. That's when he started seeing that some BOD members weren't there for wholesome reasons. He saw that they weren't all rowing in the same direction. Some of the folks haven't seen that the old tactics aren't working, haven't been, and don't want to change.    We got into it a bit more of course. He's very passionate about the NRA and what is going on and what needs to be changed. I really enjoyed the conversation with Jonathan and I look forward to seeing him in Atlanta in April.    This wraps up the five interviews I've done with the NRA 2.0 Candidates running on the reform ticket. I've had another five or so on the show over the years. I'm voting for all 28 of the “Reformers”. I enjoyed the conversations with them all. As with the NRA staff that I've had on the show, I can see the passion for the NRA and our rights that they have and they're fighting for. These 28 candidates know that the NRA didn't earn the respect of the members, their funds, and their support. I do have faith in them and what they plan on doing to resurrect the NRA from what has been going on. I have confidence in them and I'm looking forward to the progress for gun owners across the country.    While it is too late to become a life member and be able to vote, it's not too late to vote for those who haven't yet. Ballots were sent out in the February magazines and have to be received by April 6, 2025.    Favorite quotes: “The goal is to frustrate the gun owner.” “The modality that works best today is concealed carry. Not open carry.” “The fact that I carry a gun keeps you safer. You're welcome.” “What do these politicians intend to do to me that my ownership of firearms is a threat to them.” “NRA is back on the map. We're clean. We're well run. We deserve to get out seat at the table back.”   Elect A New NRA Website https://electanewnra.com/   Goldstein Law Partners https://goldsteinlp.com/   Second Amendment Foundation https://secure.anedot.com/saf/donate?sc=RidingShotgun    Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms https://www.ccrkba.org/     Please support the Riding Shotgun With Charlie sponsors and supporters.    Self Defense Radio Network http://sdrn.us/   Buy a Powertac Flashlight, use RSWC as the discount code and save 15% www.powertac.com/RSWC   SABRE Red Pepper Spray  https://lddy.no/1iq1n   Or listen on: iTunes/Apple podcasts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/riding-shotgun-with-charlie/id1275691565

Joseph Bruen joins Jeff to chat about hosting conventions and guests.

In this gripping episode, we dive deep into President Donald Trump's recent Executive Order targeting the constitutionality of gun control measures in America. With heated debates raging over Second Amendment rights, public safety, and federal overreach, we unpack the implications of this bold political move. Is the EO a necessary pushback against perceived government infringement, or does it risk undermining critical safeguards? Join us as we analyze the legal, historical, and societal layers of the debate, featuring insights from constitutional scholars, gun policy experts, and voices from both sides of the aisle. We'll explore: - The specifics of Trump's Executive Order and its direct impact on existing gun laws. - How the Supreme Court's *Heller* and *Bruen* decisions shape today's constitutional battleground. - The balance between individual liberties and collective security in an era of mass shootings and polarization. - What this means for states' rights, the NRA, and grassroots activism. Whether you're a staunch defender of the Second Amendment or advocate for stricter regulations, this episode challenges assumptions and sparks critical dialogue about one of America's most divisive issues. Tune in for a fact-driven, no-holds-barred conversation that arms you with the context to decide: **Where does the line between freedom and safety

Send us a textAs the title suggests, this episode covers multiple federal court rulings that followed the Bruen principle, and the inevitable legal ruling when applied!!Royce's Upcoming classes (don't forget to use the discount code(s) Royce revealed in this episode!).Defensive Pistol Fundamentals | Brevard County, Florida | Royce Productions, IncAdvanced Defensive Pistol | Brevard County, Florida | Royce Productions, Inc SHOOTINGCLASSES.COMOnline business operations platform for firearms instructors, trainees, and Shooting RangesGlover Orndorf and Flanagan Wealth Mgmt.Wealth management servicesControl Jiu-Jitsu/MMAJiu-Jitsu/MMA Training in Melbourne, FLFreedom GunsFirearms, Ammunition, Accessories, Training classes The Gun Site9-Lane 25 yard indoor Shooting Range, Gun Store, Training classesWJS GunsGun and Outdoor Shop, ammo, accessories, fishing tackle, moreSicarios Gun ShopFirearms, Accessories, Ammo, Safes, and more!The American Police Hall of FameMuseum and Shooting Center (open to public), Law Enforcement and Civilian TrainingCounter Strike TacticalBest Little Gun Store in Melbourne, Florida! Veteran Owned and Operated 321-499-4949Go2 WeaponsManufacturers of AR platform rifles for military and civilian. Veteran Owned and OperatedEar Care of MelbourneNeed hearing aids? Go to the audiologists that gave Royce his hearing back!Quantified PerformanceQuantified Performance, LLC is focused on building safe, high performing keepers and bearers.Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the showGiveSendGo | Unconstitutional 2A Prosecution of Tate Adamiak Askari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

There's so much 2A news that Erin and Weer'd can't handle it by themselves! In This Episode Erin, Weer'd, David, and Oddball discuss: a mass shooting in Sweden and the calls for yet more gun control (despite Sweden's gun laws being some of the strictest in Europe); a teenage gunman's attempt to steal a plane being thwarted by an armed pilot; a New York Times story about YouTube influencers and changing gun culture; the ruling by a District Court judge in Mississippi that the machine gun ban is unconstitutional post-Bruen; an Appeals Court in Louisiana ruling that suppressors aren't "arms"...  but is that good? an Illinois judge's ruling that FOID cards are unconstitutional; President Trump's Executive Order to "Protect the Second Amendment" and what it  may mean; Everytown admitting that gun control is an infringement; the DOGE Audit uncovering the web of taxpayer money funding gun control, including Bloomberg, the Brady Center, Giffords, and others. Did you know that we have a Patreon? Join now for the low, low cost of $4/month (that's $1/podcast) and you'll get to listen to our podcast on Friday instead of Mondays, as well as patron-only content like mag dump episodes, our hilarious blooper reels and film tracks. Show Notes Gunman in Sweden school shooting 'shot himself dead after killing 10 people' Browning BAR Rifle Review: Vintage Gentleman's Hunting Semi-Auto Sweden to tighten gun control laws after deadly shooting Pilot stops teen who entered a regional airport with guns, demanding a plane How YouTube Is Changing American Gun Culture Kentucky Ballistics & the Slow Mo Guys District Court Judge Rules Ban on Machinegun Ownership Unconstitutional Under Bruen Court Rules Suppressors are NOT Protected by the Second Amendment Judge Webb Finds Statutes in FOID Card Act Unconstitutional in People vs. Brown Protecting Second Amendment Rights EXECUTIVE ORDER Everytown right now: "If they get rid of Second Amendment infringements, we won't have any gun laws left!" EXPOSED: Taxpayer Dollars Laundered Through NGOs to Everytown, Other Anti-Gun Operations  

This is the beginning of a discussion of the Constitution and gun law. President Trump tasked AG Bondi with sorting out all of the BATFE rules and regs on guns. Any not in clear agreement with the Constitution were to be thrown out. I go through the key issues, focusing on historySurveys on Defensive Gun Use1791ReconstructionNational Firearms Act of 1934Sonzinzky caseMiller CaseHeller CaseCaetano CaseBruen CaseRahimi caseSnope casewww.lawofselfdefense.com Attorney Andrew Branca

On-Location Interview with Chris Cheng, History Channel's Top Shot Season 4 Champion, from the 2025 SHOT Show in Las Vegas. Chris is a self taught amateur turned pro after beating 17 competitors to win $100,000, the title of “Top Shot” and a pro shooting contract with Bass Pro Shops. He's worked in Silicon Valley for 15 years and is passionate about bringing new shooters into the gun community. Chris serves on both NRA and NSSF Outreach committees, and is on the board for Operation Blazing Sword and Pink Pistols, a pro-LGBT, pro-2A organization, as well as on the board for the Asian Pacific American Gun Owners Association known by their acronym APAGOA. APAGOA and Operation Blazing Sword submitted an amicus brief for an upcoming Supreme Court case (Ocean State Tactical vs Rhode Island) to challenge RI's AW and high capacity magazine ban. We also submitted an AB to the famous Bruen case. Chris is also in the process of writing a war novel about The Purple Heart Battalion, a group of courageous Americans of Japanese descent who volunteered from the incarceration camps to fight for our country. They are the most decorated unit in US military history. SHOT Show (Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade Show) is an annual event held in Las Vegas, primarily for professionals in the firearms, ammunition, and outdoor industries. The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) hosts this event, which is one of the largest trade shows of its kind, where manufacturers, dealers, and enthusiasts gather to showcase new products, network, and discuss industry trends. The show features everything from firearms and accessories to outdoor gear and survival tools, drawing thousands of attendees from around the world. Originally Aired 2.12.25

Episode 224- NJ Concealed Cary Proven to Save Lives Also Available On Searchable Podcast Transcript Gun Lawyer-- Episode 224 Transcript SUMMARY KEYWORDS New Jersey concealed carry, gun violence, racial disparities, permit denials, Second Amendment, Bruen decision, hollow nose ammo, Civilian Marksmanship Program,

Send us a textFederal Air Marshall wrongly arrested, prosecuted and imprisoned by the ATF for false suppressor charges.Royce's thoughts on Pam Bondi.Federal court strikes down ban on 18-20-year-olds purchasing and owning firearms with a Bruen application!.NJ violent crime rate drops after over 58,000 New Jersey citizens start carrying guns.More New Mexico gun control bills proffered.The American Police Hall of FameMuseum and Shooting Center (open to public), Law Enforcement and Civilian TrainingFreedom GunsFirearms, Ammunition, Accessories, Training classes The Gun Site9-Lane 25 yard indoor Shooting Range, Gun Store, Training classesWJS GunsGun and Outdoor Shop, ammo, accessories, fishing tackle, moreSHOOTINGCLASSES.COMOnline business operations platform for firearms instructors, trainees, and Shooting RangesCounter Strike TacticalBest Little Gun Store in Melbourne, Florida! Veteran Owned and Operated 321-499-4949Go2 WeaponsManufacturers of AR platform rifles for military and civilian. Veteran Owned and OperatedEar Care of MelbourneNeed hearing aids? Go to the audiologists that gave Royce his hearing back!Glover Orndorf and Flanagan Wealth Mgmt.Wealth management servicesQuantified PerformanceQuantified Performance, LLC is focused on building safe, high performing keepers and bearers.Sicarios Gun ShopFirearms, Accessories, Ammo, Safes, and more!Control Jiu-Jitsu/MMAJiu-Jitsu/MMA Training in Melbourne, FLDisclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the showGiveSendGo | Unconstitutional 2A Prosecution of Tate Adamiak Askari Media GroupBuy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

This Day in Legal History: 13th Amendment PassedOn January 31, 1865, the U.S. Congress passed the 13th Amendment, formally abolishing slavery in the United States. The amendment declared that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." While President Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation had freed enslaved people in Confederate-held territories two years earlier, it lacked the permanence of a constitutional amendment. The House of Representatives passed the measure by a vote of 119 to 56, narrowly reaching the required two-thirds majority after intense political maneuvering. The Senate had already approved it in April 1864. Ratification by the states followed, culminating in its adoption on December 6, 1865. The amendment marked a legal end to slavery, but systemic racial discrimination persisted through Black Codes, Jim Crow laws, and other restrictive measures. Despite this, the 13th Amendment laid the foundation for future civil rights advancements. Its passage was a key victory for abolitionists and a defining moment of the Civil War's aftermath. The amendment's "punishment for crime" clause later became a subject of controversy, as it allowed convict leasing and forced labor in prisons, disproportionately affecting Black Americans. Even today, debates continue over its implications for the U.S. prison system.Fox Rothschild LLP has blocked its lawyers from using DeepSeek, a Chinese AI startup, due to concerns about client data security. While the firm allows AI tools like ChatGPT with restrictions, DeepSeek's data storage in China raises unique risks, according to Mark G. McCreary, the firm's chief AI and information security officer. A recent data breach involving DeepSeek further heightened security concerns. Other major law firms, including Wilson Sonsini and Polsinelli, are also implementing strict vetting processes for new AI models. Wilson Sonsini requires its chief information security officer and general counsel to approve AI tools before use, while Polsinelli enforces firm-wide restrictions on unapproved AI software. Law firms are also monitoring AI use by third-party vendors to ensure compliance with security protocols. McCreary emphasized that established legal tech companies prioritize data protection, reducing the risk of firms switching to less secure AI models.Fox Rothschild Blocks DeepSeek's AI Model for Attorney UseA federal appeals court has ruled that the U.S. government's ban on licensed firearms dealers selling handguns to adults under 21 is unconstitutional. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a previous ruling, citing the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires modern gun laws to align with historical firearm regulations. The federal ban, enacted in 1968, was challenged by young adults and gun rights groups, who argued it violated the Second Amendment. Judge Edith Jones, writing for the court, found insufficient historical evidence to justify restricting gun sales for 18-to-20-year-olds. The ruling marks a major shift in gun policy, aligning with broader legal trends expanding Second Amendment protections. The Justice Department, which defended the ban under the Biden administration, has not yet commented on the decision. Gun rights advocates hailed the ruling as a victory against age-based firearm restrictions.US ban on gun sales to adults under age 21 is unconstitutional, court rules | ReutersIn a piece for Techdirt, Karl Bode critiques the Trump FCC's decision to roll back efforts to curb exclusive broadband deals between landlords and internet providers. The Biden FCC had attempted to update outdated rules that allowed ISPs to form monopolies within apartment buildings, driving up prices and reducing competition. However, due to delays caused by industry opposition and the failed nomination of reformer Gigi Sohn, key proposals—including a ban on bulk billing—were left unapproved. When Brendan Carr took over as FCC chair under Trump, he quickly scrapped these pending consumer protections. Bode argues that U.S. telecom policy is stuck in a cycle where Democrats make half-hearted attempts at reform, only for Republicans to dismantle them entirely under the guise of deregulation. The result is a landscape where telecom giants and landlords continue to collude, leaving consumers with fewer choices, higher costs, and poor service.The Trump FCC Makes It Easier For Your Landlord And Your ISP To Collude To Rip You Off | TechdirtBally's Chicago casino project is facing a legal challenge over its commitment to reserving 25% of its investment opportunities for women and people of color. Conservative activist Edward Blum, known for spearheading lawsuits against affirmative action, filed the suit on behalf of two white men who claim they were unfairly excluded from investing. The lawsuit argues that the policy violates federal civil rights law and should be open to all investors regardless of race. This case is part of a broader push against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, which gained momentum after a recent executive order from President Trump eliminating DEI programs in the federal government. Bally's maintains that its agreement with the city complies with legal requirements. The lawsuit references an 1866 civil rights law originally meant to protect Black Americans' economic rights and is similar to other cases challenging race-conscious corporate policies. Blum's organization has previously led legal battles against diversity-focused scholarships, grants, and hiring programs, including the Supreme Court case that struck down race-based college admissions in 2023.America's Battle Over DEI Strikes a Chicago Casino's Financing PlanThis week's closing theme is by Franz Schubert.Franz Schubert, one of the most beloved composers of the early Romantic era, was born on this day in 1797 in Vienna, Austria. Though he lived only 31 years, his vast output of music—ranging from symphonies and chamber works to piano music and over 600 songs—continues to inspire musicians and audiences alike. Schubert's music is often characterized by its lyricism, rich harmonies, and deep emotional expression, seamlessly bridging the clarity of the Classical era with the passion of Romanticism.Despite his immense talent, Schubert struggled with financial stability and never achieved widespread fame during his lifetime. He spent much of his career composing in relative obscurity, supported by a close-knit circle of friends and fellow artists. His songs, or lieder, are especially celebrated for their ability to capture both the beauty and melancholy of the human experience, with works like Erlkönig and Winterreise standing as some of the greatest achievements in the genre.His instrumental music, however, remained underappreciated until long after his death. Today, his symphonies, string quartets, and piano sonatas are recognized as masterpieces, filled with lyrical beauty and striking contrasts. Among his later works, the Piano Sonata No. 20 in A major, D. 959 showcases his mature style, blending elegance with deep introspection. The final movement, Rondo: Allegretto, serves as this week's closing theme, capturing both Schubert's charm and his poignant sense of longing.Though he died in 1828, just a year after Beethoven, Schubert's influence only grew in the decades that followed. Composers like Schumann, Brahms, and even Mahler admired his work, helping to cement his legacy as one of music's great geniuses. Today, on the anniversary of his birth, we celebrate the life and music of a composer who, despite facing struggles and setbacks, left behind an extraordinary body of work that continues to resonate across centuries.Without further ado, Franz Schubert's Piano Sonata No. 20 in A major, D. 959.  This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Today, Hunter is joined by Professor Jacob Charles to discuss the Second Amendment. Since D.C. v Heller in 2008, the Second Amendment transformed from nearly dead letter law to one of the most rapidly changing areas of the Constitution. Jake joins the show to detail that transformation and explain the impacts it is having on our legal system.   Guests: Jacob Charles, Professor of Law, Pepperdine University Caruso School of Law   Resources: Contact Jake https://law.pepperdine.edu/faculty-research/jacob-charles/ https://bsky.app/profile/jacobdcharles.bsky.social https://x.com/JacobDCharles SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=1714457 Heller https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/ Bruen https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf Rahimi https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-915_8o6b.pdf   Contact Hunter Parnell:                                 Publicdefenseless@gmail.com  Instagram @PublicDefenselessPodcast Twitter                                                                 @PDefenselessPod www.publicdefenseless.com  Subscribe to the Patron www.patreon.com/PublicDefenselessPodcast  Donate on PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=5KW7WMJWEXTAJ Donate on Stripe https://donate.stripe.com/7sI01tb2v3dwaM8cMN Trying to find a specific part of an episode? Use this link to search transcripts of every episode of the show! https://app.reduct.video/o/eca54fbf9f/p/d543070e6a/share/c34e85194394723d4131/home  

Last term, the Supreme Court decided United States v. Rahimi, which built upon the text-first, history-second methodology articulated by the Supreme Court in Heller and reaffirmed in Bruen. Many hot button Second Amendment issues are percolating through the lower courts and are likely to reach this Supreme Court in the coming terms. This panel will discuss Rahimi's impact on the text and history methodology as applied to legal challenges to "gun free zones", bans on semi-automatic rifles and "high capacity" magazines, age restrictions, and restrictions on misdemeanants. The panel will also discuss several important methodological issues that are common to many Second Amendment litigations, including the debate whether 1791 or 1868 is the correct time to determine the meaning of the Second Amendment.Featuring:Prof. William Merkel, Associate Professor, Charleston School of LawMr. Mark W. Smith, Senior Fellow, Ave Maria School of Law and Host of the Four Boxes Diner Second Amendment ChannelMr. David Thompson, Partner, Cooper & KirkModerator: Hon. Amul Thapar, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Hello everybody! We are on to business as usual, updating you on U.S. v. Rahimi. This is a case about the permissibility of 2nd amendment restrictions. If you need additional background, we recommend you go back and listen to the original U.S. v. Rahimi episode, as well as the NY State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen episode. Linked below are some resources on the Rahimi case for your viewing! Thanks for tuning in. As for the NC Supreme Court race, Justice Allison Riggs appears to have won by a slim 625 votes. There will likely be a recount. If you want to learn more about her, we recommend that you go back and listen to our interview with her, entitled "Campaigning with Conviction". https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-915 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-915_8o6b.pdf https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence-d63ee828e51911cc5e5a01780820f224

In this case, the court considered this issue: Does 18 U-S-C § 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, violate the Second Amendment?    The case was decided on June 21, 2024. The Supreme Court held that when an individual has been found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another, that individual may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment. Chief Justice John Roberts authored the 8-1 majority opinion of the Court. The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is fundamental but not unlimited. When examining a challenged regulation, the Court considers whether it is consistent with historical principles, not necessarily identical to historical laws. The key factors are why and how the regulation burdens the right. Section 922(g)(8) fits within this tradition. Historically, two legal regimes addressed firearms violence: surety laws and “going armed” laws. Surety laws allowed magistrates to require bonds from individuals suspected of future misbehavior, including firearm misuse. “Going armed” laws prohibited carrying weapons in a way that terrified the public. Both regimes targeted individuals who posed threats to others' safety. Section 922(g)(8) is relevantly similar to these historical laws. It applies to individuals found by a court to threaten others' physical safety, just as the historical laws did. The burden it imposes—temporary disarmament based on a judicial finding—is also consistent with historical practice. While not identical to historical laws, Section 922(g)(8) aligns with the principles underlying the Second Amendment and historical firearm regulations aimed at preventing violence. Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored a concurring opinion, in which Justice Elena Kagan joined, opining that the Court correctly applied its decision in Bruen, but she continues to believe that Bruen was incorrectly decided. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored a concurring opinion, emphasizing that while Section 922(g)(8) can be constitutional in some applications, the Court's ruling is narrow and leaves open many questions about the law's constitutionality in other specific circumstances. Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored a concurring opinion to review the proper roles of text, history, and precedent in constitutional interpretation. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson authored a concurring opinion, noting that two years' after Bruen, it is now clear that the unclear legal standard established in Bruen is difficult for lower courts to apply. Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored a concurring opinion, acknowledging lower courts' struggle to apply Bruen but pointing out that in this case, the Court settles on just the right level of generality Justice Clarence Thomas authored a dissenting opinion, arguing that not a single historical regulation justifies the statute at issue. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/scotus-opinions/support

Riding Shotgun With Charlie #214 News2A Shawn Abramson & Grant Kielczewski   Last year, I filmed a show with Shawn and Grant from News2A. Due to camera issues, we decided to scrap it and do it another time. That time was in Knoxville, Tenn, at the Gun Owners of America's G.O.A.L.s event. Since we first tried this, Grant up and moved from New Jersey to middle Tennessee, so this was the ideal time to make it happen again.    Shawn grew up in a mostly non-gun house, but he and his brother took any chance they could to go out and shoot with their father's friends. At 18, getting an FID and joining the NRA was on the top of the things he wanted to do as an adult. For Grant growing up in the Midwest, guns were just tools. Also buying his first gun at 18, he spent years just being a casual shooter. In the last five years, things changed for him. He's been more active in taking courses and in helping others get started on their gun owning path. He's been working more towards becoming a better instructor.    Shawn and Grant were both New Jersey guys with an idea to start a website with a focus on the Garden State.  News2A (N2A) was launched after the Bruen decision in June 2022. New Jersey finally caved, kicking and screaming, to allow their peasants to have pitchforks. And allow them to carry their pitchforks. For a while, it was a hotbed of overreaching government having a post-Bruen hissy fit. There were lots of things going on. The gents thought there needed to be a place where people could get the up to date and correct info on the goings on.   We spend some time talking about the differences between states like, New Jersey & Massachusetts, versus other states, like Florida & Tennessee. It is bad in Jersey. You cannot carry in sensitive places so you have to disarm in your car and do a lot of administrative loading and unloading. Post Bruen, New York and New Jersey really tried tamping down the rights and abilities of gun owners.    When the guys started getting more involved, they went to Trenton to watch the testimonies and see how the sausage is made. And it ain't pretty. None of the things we may have been taught in school, or from Schoolhouse Rock, really happens like that. It was an education and eye opening for them.    At one point, John Petrolino, RSWC #093, reached out to me and asked if I wanted to do some writing. He said that N2A was looking for writers and contributors for their website. He said I could send things to him to edit, then I could pass it along to N2A. In the meantime, he wrote to Shawn and Grant, saying that maybe they could publish some of my writings there. It's been a great outlet for me as a writer. I was able to cover the nonsense of the Gun Law Listening Tour in early 2023.    The website is chock full of writers. Covering topics of politics, gun rights, training, editorials. They've got about eight writers plus Shawn and Grant contributing to the site. Some I've had on the show and some still need to get in the stagecoach. They also have sections on the site that are great resources for Jersey residents, where you can carry, how to carry, how to apply for everyone. And, of course, safety tips, too.    Let me tell you, the gun folks from Jersey have aggravation in their blood about their process, licensing scheme, and the nonsense they have to deal with. There's only a handful of states that the Bruen decision really affected. These states are the most egregious about doing their best to make sure that lawful and responsible citizens have a hard time with owning, possessing, and carrying firearms. Fortunately, they've got Shawn and Grant putting in time, love, and money in keeping everyone informed and on top of the situation.  Favorite quotes: Shawn: “You meet the right people, too. They have the right values. They're just friendly people willing to help others in general.” Shawn: “They only care about making sure their party's agenda happens.” Grant:”We've tried to take this very complex information and make it as applicable to people as possible.” Grant: “I know people underestimate the value of training.” News2A Website https://www.news2a.com/   News2A Twitter/X https://twitter.com/News2ATeam   News2A Facebook https://www.facebook.com/news2a/   News2A Gab https://gab.com/News2A   US Law Shield (Code:NEWS2A) https://www.uslawshield.com/?affid=ad008c31-331d-11ef-bda8-0615552639c3 Second Amendment Foundation https://secure.anedot.com/saf/donate?sc=RidingShotgun    Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms https://www.ccrkba.org/     Please support the Riding Shotgun With Charlie sponsors and supporters.    Dennis McCurdy Author, Speaker, Firewalker http://www.find-away.com/   Self Defense Radio Network http://sdrn.us/   Buy a Powertac Flashlight, use RSWC as the discount code and save 15% www.powertac.com/RSWC   SABRE Red Pepper Spray  https://lddy.no/1iq1n   Or listen on: iTunes/Apple podcasts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/riding-shotgun-with-charlie/id1275691565

Armed American Radio's Daily Defense 10-21-24 UM campus gun free zone MI State Supreme Court refuses case and Neil McCabe on state of race for White House Today on Armed American Radio, Mark discusses University of Mi campus gun ban and how it encompasses vast swath of downtown Ann Arbor MI, because of the sheer size of the campus itself at over 3200 acres. The MI State Supreme Court refused to hear the challenge to the ban leaving it intact. Critics call it a violation of the Bruen decision because of the scope of the size of the campus itself making it nearly impossible to carry a gun anywhere in downtown Ann Arbor without violating the concealed carry ban. Comparing the ban on UM carry, Mark discussed the recent brief filed by the Second Amendment Foundation in support of summary judgement in the US Post Office carry ban recently filed in FT Worth TX, as CCW is also banned in US Postal facilities nationwide. This too, is also viewed a s a violation of the recent Bruen decision as it relates to the historical context of the founding era when no bans were in place is Postal Facilities. Mark was joined halfway through the program by political analyst Neil W. McCabe from RedState.com to discuss the current news regarding the upcoming US presidential elections, polling information and swing state movements toward Trump and away from Democrats. Barrack Obama being dispatched to WI was also discussed as  evidence of the desperation of the Harris campaign and fear of losing in that state, to Trump. Support our Sponsors: Armed American Radio Sponsors BECOME A SPONSOR ARMED AMERICAN RADIO IS PRESENTED BY Advertise With Us Armed American Radio, founded by Mark Walters on April 26th, 2009 as a (20 kB) Est. reading time 11 minutes  

Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I cover new polling that finds the Supreme Court's Bruen decision is more popular than ever. We also talk about the Court's recent move to grant, vacate, and remand a lower court decision that sided with pro-gun plaintiffs. We briefly touch on some recent ad spending blitzes from gun groups on both sides of the issue before wrapping up with a discussion of what either a Trump or Harris presidency might mean in practice for gun policy. Free Dispatch trial here: https://thedispatch.com/join-offer-reload/?utmsource=thereload&utmmedium=partnerships-podcast&utm_campaign=0924

In its last term, the Supreme Court undermined the federal government's power to solve problems and the people's ability to hold their political leaders accountable. The Court was flooded with false historical arguments, and the justices relied on profoundly flawed ideas about the deep American past to help justify their radical overhaul of the law. Additionally, the Court's conservative supermajority was forced to confront the implications of one of its most damaging originalist rulings, Bruen, which undermined gun control nationwide. Meanwhile, in lower courts around the country, judges are dealing with a deluge of cases under the Court's new history-based rules about abortion, guns, and affirmative action. Where does the fight against originalism stand in 2024? And what might come next? Listen to a recording of our virtual discussion with leading historians and Brennan Center experts exploring some of the Supreme Court's most significant recent rulings, how they'll shape upcoming legal debate, and how the Court's disastrous originalist opinions are affecting hundreds of millions of lives. Speakers: Jonathan Gienapp, Associate Professor of Law, Associate Professor of History, Stanford University; Author, Against Constitutional Originalism: A Historical Critique Gautham Rao, Associate Professor of History, American University Rachel Shelden, Associate Professor of History, Director of George and Ann Richards Civil War Era Center, Pennsylvania State University Thomas Wolf, Director of Democracy Initiatives, Founder of Historians Council on the Constitution, Brennan Center Moderator: Kareem Crayton, Vice President for Washington, DC, Brennan Center Produced with support from the Kohlberg Center on the U.S. Supreme Court. Recorded on October 2, 2024.  If you enjoy this program, please give us a boost by liking, subscribing, and sharing with your friends. If you're listening on Apple Podcasts, please give it a 5-star rating.  You can check out Jonathan Gienapp's book here: https://bookshop.org/p/books/against-constitutional-originalism-a-historical-critique-jonathan-gienapp/21320944?ean=9780300265859  Keep up with the Brennan Center's work by subscribing to our weekly newsletter, The Briefing: https://go.brennancenter.org/briefing  

Today we'll start off with a bang, joining Dr. John Lott, President of the Crime Prevention Research Center to discuss the latest Crime Statistics and what he sees in the trends. We'll also discuss the real impact of Bruen. Then in hour one we'll talk a few headlines and then as always finish up with our entertainment review with Willie Waffle.

This week, we're reacting to the debate. That's why I've got one of the top political reporters in the country on the show. Dave Weigel is a writer for Semafor, who runs their Americana newsletter. He has been covering national politics across major outlets for decades now. He is one of the best-sourced reporters out there. He said Kamala Harris bringing up her gun ownership at the debate was a bit of a surprise since she hasn't talked much about that before. He agreed the fact she owns a handgun for self-defense could make her more relatable to the average gun owner than Tim Walz, who centers his gun ownership around hunting. But he doubted that would become a major part of her campaign going forward. Weigel said guns have been a relatively minor issue in the election thus far. He said that was likely due to two factors. One is the relative lack of high-profile shootings. The other is the limits on what gun control is even possible under the Supreme Court's Bruen precedent. Special Guest: Dave Weigel.

Today is our favorite day and we'll be visiting with one of our favorite columnists/editors. Jacob Sullum, Senior Editor at Reason.com comes on board to share with us the recent court decisions from around the country in regard to 'sensitive places' and the ramifications from Bruen. Then in hour two we'll take some calls and talk about some other headlines before finishing up with our entertainment critic Willie Waffle.

Riding Shotgun With Charlie #211 Dick Heller Heller v DC   Back in 2018, I was heading to hear some friends speak at the Heller 10 Celebration hosted by Second Amendment Institute. I got a call from one of my friends and she said “we're going to Heller's house”. I wondered “who's we? Is it her? Am I part of we?”. She called back and I got to go hang out at the Heller resident. The next day, I found myself being asked/told that I was going to give an impromptu speech on the Supreme Court Steps. I've seen Dick at a number of events and got to film this show on our way to go shoot sporting clays at the M&M Hunting Preserve in New Jersey. He was the keynote at a fundraiser the night before. We shot clays with John Petrolino (RSWC #093), Gabby Franco (RSWC #), and Eric, who was helping get Dick around for the weekend.    We've all heard of the Heller decision. We all know what happened in the Heller case. It's been cited and referenced in cases upon cases. It's referenced in the McDonald v Chicago and NYSRPA v Bruen. If you haven't read that “magnificent Scalia decision”, you need to do some homework.    The Heller case was ruled in 2008, but it started years before. Getting a case to the SCOTUS takes time and money. And lots of both. Several years before, Dick was friends with a fighter pilot and instructor and Vietnam veteran. He was also an Olympic shooter in 1980. Dick rented him a room. So he came over with a truck full of guns, which was illegal at the time, and said they're all going to jail. The friend got the guns out of DC and decided that he was going to go to law school to fight this nonsense. Heller said he was going to become a cop and they'll give him a gun to protect them, but he won't be able to protect himself. This is the beginning of the case.    When the case was done, Heller had to sign 12 more papers for another case just so the lawyers would get paid. He points out that the government pays to fight us with our own money in the form of taxes. And we also have to pay with our own money to fight the government. Heller's team of lawyers were able to win the case despite the unlimited funds that DC has.    The case went to a federal court since it was a Constitutional issue. But it didn't rule in Heller's favor the first time. So they appealed to the DC Circuit Court. There they prevail. During one of the trials, the opposing attorney admits to the judge that they just don't want guns in DC. The lawyer hadn't seen or heard the news that crimes in DC at the time was rising and a very violent city to live in.   Heller also shares that with his ruling in 2008 and with Sandy Hook happening in 2012, he was posed with what kind of influence his case could have been responsible for that incident. Ultimately, each individual has to be responsible for their actions. His ruling shouldn't, and didn't, have anything to do with other acts of evil people.    For years now, Heller has been associated with Gun Owners of America because they are the group that will not compromise our rights away. He's been to a number of the Coalition of New Jersey Gun Owners and Women for Gun Rights events up and down the east coast. And he's been to several of the other national 2A events around the country. If you get a chance to see him and hear him speak, you need to take that. He's a national treasure. And you can hear some of his story here.    Favorite quotes: “Everybody out there can do a little bit of something.” “The city has unlimited funding in the form of our tax dollars… with which to hurt us with our own money.” “You don't whimp your way to the Supreme Court.” “In the arrogance of government, they thought they would have the high court voting on their side of the law.” “Sometimes you have to pull up your big  boy pants and understand who you are and what you're doing.” Heller Foundation https://www.hellerfoundation.org/   The Heller Decision https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep554/usrep554570/usrep554570.pdf   Gun Owners of America https://www.gunowners.org/   Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners https://www.cnjfo.com/ Second Amendment Foundation https://secure.anedot.com/saf/donate?sc=RidingShotgun    Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms https://www.ccrkba.org/     Please support the Riding Shotgun With Charlie sponsors and supporters.    Buy RSWC & GunGram shirts & hoodies, stickers & patches, and mugs at the store! http://ridingshotgunwithcharlie.com/rswc-shop/   Dennis McCurdy Author, Speaker, Firewalker http://www.find-away.com/   Self Defense Radio Network http://sdrn.us/   Buy a Powertac Flashlight, use RSWC as the discount code and save 15% www.powertac.com/RSWC   SABRE Red Pepper Spray  https://lddy.no/1iq1n   Or listen on: iTunes/Apple podcasts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/riding-shotgun-with-charlie/id1275691565

In this episode of Gun Talk Nation, host Ryan Gresham discusses the complexities of gun laws and the concept of "sensitive places" with Adam Kraut from the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). They dive into the challenges of carrying firearms even with a permit, recent legal battles, and the impact of Bruen on gun rights. Take advantage of this critical conversation about the Second Amendment and its implications.Learn more about the Second Amendment Foundation: https://saf.org/This Gun Talk Nation is brought to you by: Second Amendment Foundation, Vortex Optics, Hodgdon Powder, SDS Imports, Ballistic Advantage, Ruger, Stag Arms and Silencer Central. For more content, subscribe to Gun Talk at guntalktv.com, on Gun Talk's Roku, Apple TV, iOS app, Android app, or find Gun Talk on YouTube, Rumble, Facebook, Instagram, X and guntalk.com. Listen to all Gun Talk Podcasts with Spreaker, iHeart, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you find podcasts.Copyright ©2024 Freefire Media, LLC

This week, we're covering the very first time since the Supreme Court handed down the Bruen ruling that a federal judge has struck down the machinegun ban. That may have implications for not just the ban itself but the law it is housed under: The National Firearms Act (NFA). That's why we've got a gun-rights lawyer who has handled NFA cases. Matt Larosiere gives his view of what the holding in US v. Morgan means for the ban on post-1986 fully-automatic weapons and the NFA writ large. He notes the case doesn't include an injunction against the ban. Instead, it's limited to the named defendant. He argued it's very likely to be appealed and unlikely to win at the next level, though he couldn't say for sure. Larosiere said the barrier to plaintiffs winning cases against the ban was less a legal one than a public or judicial perception one. Still, he argued the victory in Morgan was not meaningless. He said it would help him and other gun-rights activists in future cases against the ban as well as other portions of the NFA. Special Guest: Matt Larosiere.

Send us a Text Message.Two recent rulings against the ATF and their arrogance have them panicking that they're losing the power they've incrementally wrestled away from the People for decades.First, a judge gives them 60 days to return all of the Forced Reset Triggers they went door-to-door confiscating after they their definition to "machine gun", because His Honor said they were not machine guns, according to the legal definition thereof.Then, a ruling that is sure to be the foundation for a powerful challenge to the NFA very soon, when a judge ruled that the People have a right to own machine guns without registering them with the ATF, because machine guns are protected by the 2nd Amendment!!Tune in and share!Support the Show.Buy Paul Eberle's book "Look at the Dirt"Paul Eberle (lookatthedirt.com)The Deadly Path: How Operation Fast & Furious and Bad Lawyers Armed Mexican Cartels: Forcelli, Peter J., MacGregor, Keelin, Murphy, Stephen: 9798888456491: Amazon.com: BooksVoice of the Blue (buzzsprout.com)

In this episode, co-host Felicia Ellsworth and Counsel Ryan Chabot discuss United States v. Rahimi, a recent decision that concerns the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), a statute which prohibits individuals who are subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms. Key foundational support for Rahimi was established in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, a 2022 Supreme Court decision which enacted a test for Second Amendment challenges. The final decision in Rahimi, along with Bruen, provides the courts with a framework for determining what gun control laws are constitutional, and stands as a significant decision for ongoing Second Amendment litigation. Ellsworth and Chabot dive into the details of both Bruen and Rahimi, with Chabot explaining the historical intricacies of interpreting and litigating Second Amendment cases. He also speaks to the amicus brief he filed with Partner Alan Schoenfeld and Associate Josh Feinzig on behalf of Everytown for Gun Safety, a nonprofit that advocates for gun control and against gun violence. The organization was in support of the federal government's position that the statute at issue is constitutional and saw a sweeping victory in its favor in the Court's final ruling.This episode is the latest installment of our miniseries examining notable decisions recently issued by the US Supreme Court. Previous episodes covering this year's term looked at the decisions in cases including Cantero v. Bank of America, Alexander v. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, Department of State v. Muñoz and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe Bank of England just cut their rates. The Feds turned is approaching. The economy continues to break down and more layoffs are on there way. The Fed will wait until right before the election. They will do this to show everyone the economy is doing well. The economy will begin to implode. [KH] is the new shiny object, and the shine is wearing off. The people are quickly learning that [KH] is a phony just like the D party itself. Soon the [DS] will swap her out, that time is approaching quickly. The precipice is approaching, the people will soon learn who the true enemy really is. The [DS] is trapped in their own agenda.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1818966295586484678 https://twitter.com/bungarsargon/status/1818969734013956126  https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1819005017749069870   entered a recession. Meanwhile, it is expected that the US labor market has added 175,000 new jobs in July. If the US adds jobs in July, it would mark the 43rd consecutive month of job additions. The disconnect between data and reality is concerning. https://twitter.com/GRDecter/status/1818709593314205821 The Federal Reserve sees cooler inflation and slower job market, suggesting a rate cut is nearing The Federal Reserve said Wednesday that greater progress has been made in reducing inflation to its 2% target, a sign that the central bank is moving closer toward cutting its key interest rate for the first time in four years. Source: apnews.com   Political/Rights  https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1818652821878981067 Less Than Two Weeks as the VP Nominee and JD Vance Has Already Visited the Border-“Has Your Border Czar Done Anything You've Asked Her to Do?”  Less than two weeks after being named Trump's running mate, JD Vance has already visited the border. Vance spoke to reporters from the southern border. Source: thegatewaypundit.com 14 People Arrested in Human Trafficking Sting at Comic-Con Event  Fourteen people were arrested in a human trafficking sting during the annual Comic-Con event in San Diego. California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the operation was conducted between July 25 and 27, and a total of 10 victims were rescued, including one child.   Per The Hollywood Reporter:   Source: thegatewaypundit.com   Geopolitical/Police State New Jersey AR-15 Ban Ruled Unconstitutional - but Magazine Ban Upheld   a federal judge struck down New Jersey's ban on the AR-15 rifle but left in place the ban on magazines with greater than a ten-round capacity. U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan issued the ruling. New Jersey's ban on the AR-15 rifle is unconstitutional, but the state's cap on magazines over 10 rounds passes constitutional muster, a federal judge said Tuesday.  This is a qualified win for Second Amendment advocates and, arguably, for the state of New Jersey. While the decision once more acknowledges the Bruen decision, it also side-steps the magazine capacity issue. This decision will be appealed, and almost certainly by both sides. The magazine ban issue, which rankles (rightly) the pro-Second Amendment side will be challenged, while New Jersey will certainly appeal the decision on the AR-15. For now, though, Second Amendment advocates can celebrate a win - even if it is a mixed blessing - and gird themselves for the next round in this never-ending fight. Source: redstate.com Don Lemon Sues Elon Musk,

Governor Healy of Massachusetts has really outdone herself this time, and she is proving that the disarmament regime is still in full swing. This time she straight up states that the reason why she felt the need to pass this wild bill, is because of the Supreme Court's Bruen decision. Absolutely wild stuff happening right now. Victory Drive Merch is NOW AVAILABLE at the WCB STORE! Interact with me on X (Twitter) Instagram Facebook https://www.workingclassbowhunter.com/victorydrive Victory Drive is proudly presented by Grizzly Coolers and Supported by these Amazing Partners! Grizzly Coolers Code WCB Black Ovis Code VICTORY Huntworth Code WCB15 MTN OPS Code VICTORY Don't forget to check out the other shows on the WCB Podcast Network! Working Class Bowhunter Podcast! Tackle & Tacos! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jim talks with Bob Levy about the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, in the Supreme Court. They discuss Bob's late-career move to law, never being too old to reinvent yourself, how Bob got involved in a pivotal Supreme Court case in establishing the modern interpretation of the Second Amendment, the text of the Second Amendment, District of Columbia v. Heller, United States v. Miller, United States v. Emerson, the scholarship around framing the Second Amendment as an individual right, the state of play of gun control in D.C. at the time, the handgun ban, handguns in the home for self-defense, the NRA case & a rookie error by the NRA's lawyers, legal strategy in the Heller case, sufficient vs necessary conditions for exercising the right, the meaning of "well-regulated," the specific holdings in Heller, the meaning of fundamental rights, Breyer's dissent against Scalia's opinion, the rational basis standard, McDonald v. City of Chicago, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, "good moral character," the murky precedent of striking down laws that weren't present during the framing era, a strict scrutiny approach, speculations on the future of Second Amendment jurisprudence, ghost guns, and much more. Episode Transcript The Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Supreme Court Cases Radically Expanded Government and Eroded Freedom, by Robert Levy & William Mellor "The Peculiar Story of United States v. Miller," by Brian L. Frye Bob Levy was, for 14 years, chairman of the board of directors at the Cato Institute. He is now chairman emeritus. Bob joined Cato as senior fellow in constitutional studies in 1997 after 25 years in business. The Institute's Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies is named in his honor. He has also served on boards of the Federalist Society, the Foundation for Government Accountability, and the Institute for Justice. Bob received his PhD in business from the American University in 1966, then founded CDA Investment Technologies, a major provider of investment information and software. At age 50, after leaving CDA in 1991, Bob went to George Mason law school, where he was chief articles editor of the law review and class valedictorian. He received his JD degree in 1994. The next two years he clerked for Judge Royce Lamberth on the US District Court and Judge Douglas Ginsburg on the US Court of Appeals, both in Washington, DC.

It's News Day Tuesday! Sam and Emma break down the biggest headlines of the day. But first they speak with Peter Shamshiri, or Law Boy on Twitter, co-host of If Books Could Kill & the 5-4 Podcast, to discuss the recent decisions handed down by the Supreme Court, and what to expect with the decisions still yet to come. Sam and Emma run through updates on Julian Assange's plea deal, today's primaries, Israeli military violence, Biden's Student Loan plan, Louisiana's education reform, Texas' abortion ban, Infowars, and the post-IRA US economy, also diving into George Latimer's appearance on CNN to blame Jamaal Bowman for his wild ethnic insensitivities. Peter Shamshiri then joins, tackling what to expect from the last couple weeks of this SCOTUS term and touching on the ever-(Juris)prudent Alito-Thomas relationship. Next, Peter walks Sam and Emma through the various major decisions that have come out of the Court in recent weeks, first looking to Moore v. US' narrow address of tax law, what it means for the future of a wealth tax, and what (if any) pathway exists to get around this conservative court's absurd requirements for the federal government, also looking to US v. Rahimi role in cleaning up the mess the Court set for themselves two years prior with NY State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen's requirement that gun regulations be consistent with the “nation's historical tradition” of 2A regulations, and why this entire fiasco is a perfect representation of the problems with this SCOTUS' reactionary tendencies and pseudo-originalism. After briefly assessing a final decision in State Dept. v. Muñoz, and how it may fit into a future attack on marriage equality, Shamshiri, Sam, and Emma wrap up the interview by pondering the future of this Court under a theoretical second Biden term. And in the Fun Half: Sam and Emma watch a former head of the Shin Bet unpack the root of Israeli insecurity in their occupation of Gaza, Van Jones compares anti-settlement protesters to pogroms and Keffiyehs to Confederate Flags, and the MR team touches on (totally unrelated) the rise of actual violence against Muslims in the US. John from San Antonio provides some primary previews, Real America's Voice, CNN, and Fox preview the absurd narratives heading into Thursday's presidential debate, and Scatt Walsh talks homosexuality. Elijah from Tennessee discusses the pervasion of Nazism in gaming, Neil from San Francisco on Big Tech and the wealthy's eviction of the working class, and Kowalski gives a long-awaited Ag Report, plus, your calls and IMs! VOTE ON THE VERGOGNA SHIRT DESIGN YOU LIKE THE MOST! (INSTRUCTIONS IN VIDEO DESCRIPTION): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WP4ziHtkxiM&ab_channel=TheMajorityReportw%2FSamSeder Follow Peter on Twitter here: https://x.com/The_Law_Boy Check out If Books Could Kill here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/if-books-could-kill/id1651876897 Check out the 5-4 Podcast here: https://www.patreon.com/fivefourpod Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Check out all volunteering opportunities ahead of Rep. Jamaal Bowman's primary on Tuesday 6/25!: https://www.mobilize.us/jamaalbowman/ Check out this canvassing event for Rep. Jamaal Bowman and volunteer if you can!: https://actionnetwork.org/forms/new-york-canvassing-event?source=tmr Phone bank for Rep. Jamaal Bowman through the Working Families Party here!: https://www.mobilize.us/workingfamiliespartycoordinated/event/624109/ Phone bank for Rep. Jamaal Bowman through "Jews For Jamaal" here!: https://www.mobilize.us/nea/event/618446/ Find our Rumble stream here!: https://rumble.com/user/majorityreport Join Sam on the Nation Magazine Cruise! 7 days in December 2024!!: https://nationcruise.com/mr/ Check out the "Repair Gaza" campaign courtesy of the Glia Project here: https://www.launchgood.com/campaign/rebuild_gaza_help_repair_and_rebuild_the_lives_and_work_of_our_glia_team#!/ Check out StrikeAid here!; https://strikeaid.com/ Gift a Majority Report subscription here: https://fans.fm/majority/gift Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: http://majority.fm/app Check out today's sponsors: Nutrafol: Take the first step towards achieving your hair growth goals. For a limited time, Nutrafol is offering our listeners ten dollars off your first month's subscription and free shipping when you go to https://Nutrafol.com/men and enter the promo code TMR.  Find out why over 4,500 healthcare professionals and stylists recommend Nutrafol for healthier hair. https://Nutrafol.com/men code TMR. Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattLech @BradKAlsop Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

Another major case for the “not a loss/not exactly a win” pile this term at SCOTUS. A majority of the Supreme Court's conservative majority said what we knew all along - adjudicated domestic abusers shouldn't hold onto second amendment rights and the guns that they are statistically, horrifyingly, apt to use to harm their intimate partners. In an 8-1 decision in United States v Rahimi, the Roberts Court looked frantically for a way to reverse out of – while still technically upholding – its bonkers extreme originalism-fueled Bruen decision from two terms ago.   This week Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern are joined by Kelly Roskam, the Director of Law and Policy at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Later in the show, Mark and Dahlia look under the hood of Department of State v Munoz - an immigration case decided this week that Justice Sotomayor says is sewing seeds for the end of marriage equality as we know it.   This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Want more Amicus? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Another major case for the “not a loss/not exactly a win” pile this term at SCOTUS. A majority of the Supreme Court's conservative majority said what we knew all along - adjudicated domestic abusers shouldn't hold onto second amendment rights and the guns that they are statistically, horrifyingly, apt to use to harm their intimate partners. In an 8-1 decision in United States v Rahimi, the Roberts Court looked frantically for a way to reverse out of – while still technically upholding – its bonkers extreme originalism-fueled Bruen decision from two terms ago.   This week Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern are joined by Kelly Roskam, the Director of Law and Policy at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Later in the show, Mark and Dahlia look under the hood of Department of State v Munoz - an immigration case decided this week that Justice Sotomayor says is sewing seeds for the end of marriage equality as we know it.   This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Want more Amicus? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Another major case for the “not a loss/not exactly a win” pile this term at SCOTUS. A majority of the Supreme Court's conservative majority said what we knew all along - adjudicated domestic abusers shouldn't hold onto second amendment rights and the guns that they are statistically, horrifyingly, apt to use to harm their intimate partners. In an 8-1 decision in United States v Rahimi, the Roberts Court looked frantically for a way to reverse out of – while still technically upholding – its bonkers extreme originalism-fueled Bruen decision from two terms ago.   This week Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern are joined by Kelly Roskam, the Director of Law and Policy at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Later in the show, Mark and Dahlia look under the hood of Department of State v Munoz - an immigration case decided this week that Justice Sotomayor says is sewing seeds for the end of marriage equality as we know it.   This is part of Opinionpalooza, Slate's coverage of the major decisions from the Supreme Court this June. We kicked things off this year by explaining How Originalism Ate the Law. The best way to support our work is by joining Slate Plus. (If you are already a member, consider a donation or merch!) Want more Amicus? Subscribe to Slate Plus to immediately unlock exclusive SCOTUS analysis and weekly extended episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe today on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of our show page. Or, visit slate.com/amicusplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

After only three hours of deliberating, a federal jury in Delaware convicts Hunter Biden of three felony counts for buying and possessing a handgun while he was a drug addict in 2018. Does Hunter have a shot at appealing under the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court's precedent in Bruen? Plus, Joe Biden says he will respect the outcome and won't issue a pardon. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For a long time, the Court operated under what was called Legal Formalism. Legal formalism said that the job of any judge or justice was incredibly narrow. It was to basically look at the question of the case in front of them, check that question against any existing laws, and then make a decision. Unlike today, no one was going out of their way to hear what economists or sociologists or historians thought. Judges were just sticking to law books. The rationale for this way of judging was that if you always and only look at clean, dry law the decisions would be completely objective.In the late 19th, early 20th century a movement rose up to challenge legal formalism. They called themselves the legal realists. Fred Schauer, professor of law at University of Virginia. says the Realists felt that the justices weren't actually as objective as they said they were. "Supreme Court justices were often making decisions based on their own political views, their own economic views, and would disguise it in the language of precedence or earlier decisions," says Schauer. The realists said lets just accept that reality and wanted to arm the judges with more information so those judges could make more informed decisions.For a long time the debate between realists and formalists had been mostly theoretical. That is until the arrival of the Brandeis Brief. The Brandeis brief came during a pivotal court case in the early 20th century. And the man at the center of that case was a legal realist and progressive reformer named Louis Brandeis.Fact Checking the Supreme Court 

Get your tickets for Amicus Live in Washington DC here.  In the second part of our series on Amicus and at Slate.com, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern are back on the originalism beat. This week they're trying to understand the mechanisms of what Professor Saul Cornell calls “the originalism industrial complex” and how those mechanisms plug into the highest court in the land. They're also asking how and why liberals failed to find an effective answer to originalism, even as the various “originalist” ways of deciding who's history counts, what constitutional law counts, which people count, were supercharged by Trump's SCOTUS picks. Madiba Dennie, author of The Originalism Trap, highlights how the Supreme Court turned to originalism to gut voting rights. In 2022, the US Supreme Court's originalism binge ran roughshod over precedent and unleashed Dobbs and Bruen on the American people - Mark and Dahlia talk to a state Supreme Court justice about what it's like trying to apply the law amid these constitutional earthquakes.  In today's Slate Plus bonus episode, Dahlia talks to AJ Jacobs about his year of living constitutionally, and she confesses to an attempt to smuggle contraband into One, First Street.  Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Eleventh Circuit Judge Kevin Newsom takes over the role as professor to teach Sarah and David the implications of jurisdiction stripping and the balance of power between the branches of government. We'll sum the lesson up as … Congress, do your job. The Agenda: —Judges say they won't hire from Columbia Law School —Explaining the exceptions clause —Constraints over jurisdiction stripping by Congress —Marbury powers —Congress taking a more active role in constitutional interpretations Show Notes: —David for the NYT: The Magic Constitutionalism of Donald Trump —Felker v. Turpin —Sheldon v. Sill —Judge Newsom's mention of Bruen in the AO episode from June 2022 —Judiciary Act of 1979 —Akhil Amar's two-tier theory of jurisdictions —Daniel Epps' article in Columbia Law Review —Monday's AO podcast —Henry Hart's dialogue with self in the Harvard Law Review Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Get your tickets for Amicus Live in Washington DC here. In this, the first part of a special series on Amicus and at Slate.com, we are lifting the lid on an old-timey sounding method of constitutional interpretation that has unleashed a revolution in our courts, and an assault on our rights. But originalism's origins are much more recent than you suppose, and its effects much more widespread than the constitutional earthquakes of overturning settled precedent like Roe v Wade or supercharging gun rights as in Heller and Bruen. Originalism's aftershocks are being felt throughout the courts, the law, politics and our lives, and we haven't talked about it enough. On this week's show, Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern explore the history of originalism. They talk to Professor Jack Balkin about its religious valence, and Saul Cornell about originalism's first major constitutional triumph in Heller. And they'll tell you how originalism's first big public outing fell flat, thanks in part to Senator Ted Kennedy's ability to envision the future, as well as the past. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices