POPULARITY
26 episodes with bruen
15 episodes with bruen
16 episodes with bruen
9 episodes with bruen
10 episodes with bruen
9 episodes with bruen
7 episodes with bruen
10 episodes with bruen
10 episodes with bruen
5 episodes with bruen
9 episodes with bruen
6 episodes with bruen
8 episodes with bruen
6 episodes with bruen
13 episodes with bruen
4 episodes with bruen
7 episodes with bruen
4 episodes with bruen
3 episodes with bruen
5 episodes with bruen
3 episodes with bruen
3 episodes with bruen
5 episodes with bruen
5 episodes with bruen
5 episodes with bruen
4 episodes with bruen
3 episodes with bruen
5 episodes with bruen
4 episodes with bruen
3 episodes with bruen
5 episodes with bruen
4 episodes with bruen
3 episodes with bruen
3 episodes with bruen
5 episodes with bruen
4 episodes with bruen
This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Tuesday, October 3, 2023. Accountable2You Jesus is Lord. In public and in private, every area of life must be subject to his Lordship—and our use of technology is no exception. What captures our attention on the screen either glorifies or dishonors our Lord. That’s why Accountable2You is committed to promoting biblical accountability in our families and churches. Their monitoring and reporting software makes transparency easy on all of your devices, so you can say with the Psalmist, “I will not set anything worthless before my eyes.” Guard against temptation with Accountable2You, and live for God’s glory! Learn more and try it for free at Accountable2You.com/FLF https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-prohibiting-official-travel-fossil-fuel-conferences-internal-memo-shows White House prohibiting official travel to fossil fuel conferences, internal memo shows The White House is prohibiting senior administration officials from traveling for international energy engagements that promote carbon-intensive fuels, including oil, natural gas and coal, Fox News Digital has learned. The guidance — which originated from the White House National Security Council (NSC) — was revealed in a Department of Energy (DOE) memo issued internally to agency staff on Sept. 15 and obtained by Fox News Digital. The memo was authored by Deputy Secretary of Energy David Turk who outlined travel restrictions and stated officials are required to obtain approval from the NSC before attending any global energy engagement. "This guidance sets out a presumption that agencies and departments will pursue international energy engagement that advances clean energy projects," Turk wrote in the memo. "It also outlines a process for seeking limited exceptions to pursue carbon-intensive engagements on a justified geostrategic imperative or energy-for-development/energy access basis." "The guidance rules out any U.S. Government ‘engagement related to unabated or partially abated coal generation,’" he continued. "Carbon-intensive international energy engagements are those 'directly related and dedicated to the production, transportation, or consumption of carbon-intensive fuels that would lead to additional greenhouse gas emissions.'" According to the memo, carbon-intensive fossil fuels include coal, oil and natural gas. In addition, the memo notes that the guidance became effective in November 2021 and applies to all international energy engagements. Turk issued a separate memo in early April 2022, which first outlined how the DOE would implement the NSC guidance and stated that energy engagements that promote carbon-intensive fuels may only be exempt if they advance national security or are essential to support energy access in vulnerable areas. Turk's September memo updated that guidance, stating that for all future engagements, "Departments and Agencies are required to submit exemption justifications to the NSC and receive NSC concurrence before proceeding with a covered engagement." The DOE referred Fox News Digital to the NSC, which didn't respond to multiple requests for comment. Since taking office, President Biden has pursued an aggressive climate agenda, seeking to boost green energy technologies like solar and wind while curbing domestic reliance on fossil fuels like those listed by the administration as "carbon intensive." Biden has issued federal goals to ensure 50% of U.S. car purchases are zero-emissions by 2030 and that the power sector is carbon-free by 2035. However, vehicles with internal combustion engines (gasoline-powered), make up more than 99% of all cars in the U.S. and about 99% of new car sales, according to J.D. Power. And approximately 60% of electricity in the U.S. is generated from fossil fuels, mainly natural gas, while 17% is produced form wind or solar power. As part of his agenda, Biden and senior administration officials have traveled to global energy conference to boost green energy development. And officials have largely been absent from global fossil fuel summits like the World Gas Conference, which former Energy Secretary Rick Perry attended during the Trump administration. The Biden administration also opted against inviting oil and gas industry representatives to the White House Methane Summit in July. https://www.foxnews.com/us/judge-orders-new-york-dole-out-nearly-half-million-legal-fees-nra-supreme-court-victory Judge orders New York to dole out nearly half a million in legal fees to NRA after Supreme Court victory A New York judge ordered the state to pay nearly half a million dollars in legal feels to the National Rifle Association (NRA) after the gun rights group won a major case at the Supreme Court. In a case decided last summer, the Supreme Court ruled that a New York public carry licensing law was unconstitutional and that the ability to carry a pistol in public was a constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment. The NRA was a party in that case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, and last week a New York judge ordered the state to pay $447,700.82 in legal fees. "The NRA regards the $447K award in the NYSRPA V. Bruen case as a pivotal victory, a symbol that justice is definitively on our side," Michael Jean, NRA’s director of the Office of Litigation Counsel, told Fox News Digital in a statement. "This triumph in Bruen has fortified the Second Amendment in an unprecedented manner, and we continue our unrelenting fight to uphold our rights and challenge those who endeavor to infringe upon them," he added. Jean noted, however, that the payout "only scratches the surface" and covers "merely a third" of the group's legal expenses. Jean thanked the generosity of "devoted NRA members" that helped to cover the brunt of the legal fees for the case, noting that "New York refuses to fully compensate." Before the high court weighed in, the standard for carrying a weapon required an applicant to show "proper cause" for seeking a license, and allowed New York officials to exercise discretion in determining whether a person has shown a good enough reason for needing to carry a firearm. Stating that one wished to protect themselves or their property was not enough. "In this case, petitioners and respondents agree that ordinary, law-abiding citizens have a similar right to carry handguns publicly for their self-defense. We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court's opinion, referencing two previous gun cases. "Because the State of New York issues public-carry licenses only when an applicant demonstrates a special need for self-defense, we conclude that the State’s licensing regime violates the Constitution." Thomas noted that the state statute does not define what "proper cause" means, and that courts had ruled that the standard was met by people who showed a "special need for self-protection." Following the court's decision New York legislators immediately passed the Concealed Carry Improvement Act, which prohibits carrying a gun in "sensitive areas," such as stadiums, houses of worship, museums, parks and other public places; imposes revised record-keeping and new safety requirements on retailers; and mandates background checks on all ammunition purchases. Gun retailers immediately appealed to the Supreme Court in January to stop that law from going into effect while the litigation proceeds, but the high court rejected their bid. "We are challenging the ability of the state of New York to target dealers in firearms in the lawful stream of commerce, to put them out of business, which is what the new laws will do," Paloma Capanna, the lead attorney for the New York gun retailers, said. "So it really was unfortunate to see that we couldn't get any emergency temporary injunction against those laws." https://bongino.com/former-kamala-harris-adviser-who-doesnt-appear-to-live-in-california-picked-to-fill-late-dianne-feinsteins-seat Former Kamala Harris Adviser Who Doesn’t Appear to Live in California Picked to Fill Late Dianne Feinstein’s Seat So eager were Democrats to find a replacement for the late Dianne Feinstein’s Senate seat that they apparently didn’t even bother to pick someone living in California. According to the Washington Examiner: The appointment of Laphonza Butler to become California's newest senator is already raising some eyebrows as she appears to be registered to vote in Maryland with an address in that state. Registration records indicate that Butler lives in Silver Spring, Maryland, with her mailing address the same as her residential. She registered as a Democrat as of Sept. 12, 2022. Butler is the president of EMILYs List, the self-described "nation's largest resource dedicated to electing Democratic pro-choice women to office," and a longtime leader in California before her move to Maryland. On Sunday night, the newest California senator's biography on the EMILYs List website listed that "Laphonza grew up in Magnolia, MS, and attended one of the country's premier HBCUs, Jackson State University. She lives in Maryland with her partner Neneki Lee and their daughter Nylah." As of 7 a.m. Monday, the organization has removed the line that she lives in Maryland. Butler was formally Kamala Harris' 2020 campaign adviser. As radio host Dan O’Donnell noticed in real-time, Butler removed part of her biography on her Twitter account that listed Maryland as her location. Similarly, The Spectator’s Matt Foldi found that Butler’s LinkedIn page also listed her location as Maryland. Yet, merely hours after Foldi’s post, Butler’s location according to LinkedIn changed to the “Los Angeles Metropolitan Area.” Before we wrap up today… how about a little on this day in history? It’s been awhile! On this day in history… October 3rd… 42 BC First Battle of Philippi: Triumvirs Mark Antony and Octavian fight an indecisive battle with Caesar's assassins Brutus and Cassius. 1735 France and Holy Roman Emperor Charles VI sign peace accord 1778 Explorer and Captain James Cook anchors at Alaska 1849 American author Edgar Allan Poe is found delirious in a gutter in Baltimore, Maryland under mysterious circumstances; it is the last time he is seen in public before his death. 1863 US President Abraham Lincoln designates last Thursday in November as Thanksgiving Day 1913 US Federal income tax signed into law (at 1%) by President Woodrow Wilson 1941 Adolf Hitler says Russia is "already broken and will never rise again" in a broadcast to the German people 1945 Elvis Presley's 1st public performance, at age of 10, singing "Old Shep" in youth talent contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show, in Tupelo, Mississippi; contest is broadcast over WELO Radio, he wins fifth prize - $5.00 in fair ride tickets 1951 CBS-TV airs the first coast-to-coast telecast of a prize fight; Australian light-heavyweight Dave Sands outpoints American Carl 'Bobo' Olson in 10 rounds at Chicago Stadium 1976 Future Baseball Hall of Fame right fielder Hank Aaron singles in his last MLB at-bat & drives in his 2,297th run as Milwaukee Brewers lose, 5-2 v Detroit Tigers
Updating the Second Amendment. #SCOTUS: Heller 2008, McDonald 2010, Bruen 2022 and the Second Amendment. Richard A Epstein, @RichardAEpstein, @HooverInst. (ORIGINALLY POSTED JUNE 27, 2022) 1903 El Paso
Very soon Californians, residents of Washington state and maybe, just maybe, Colorado will be able to use standard capacity magazines, thanks to a decision by a federal judge in California. What are the implications for the host of other nonsense gun laws enacted by Democrats over the years? MichaelBane.TV - On the Radio episode # 189. Scroll down for reference links on topics discussed in this episode. Disclaimer: The statements and opinions expressed here are our own and may not represent those of the companies we represent or any entities affiliated to it. Host: Michael Bane Producer: Flying Dragon Ltd. More information and reference links: The California Ammo Mag Ban Ruled Unconstitutional”/Stephen Gutowski, THE RELOAD “California's Scorched Earth War on Gun Rights Presses On Despite Court Smackdown”/Victoria Taft, PJ Media Breakdown of The Benitez Ruling/Kostas Moros “Look at me, I'm the entropy Now”/Open Source Defense Ruger Precision Rifle Gen 3: Even Better/Matthew Collins, Pew Pew Tactical Timney Triggers PROOF Research Seekins Precision Anarchy Outdoors Catalyst Arms Lucid Optics Steve Clifford General Purpose Rifle Videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpTTsIX73SM https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWHLtU42hMvH_JWMODqnt-w The Music of Flint The Music of Omri Sandar
The Rich Zeoli Show- Hour 3: Jacob Sullem of Reason writes, “Last year in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned that state's restrictions on public possession of handguns for self-defense. A week later, the Court vacated four appeals court decisions upholding state gun control laws and remanded the cases for further consideration in light of Bruen. One of those cases, Duncan v. Bonta, involved California's ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, which a federal judge deemed unconstitutional in a decision published on Friday.” You can read Sullem's full article here: https://reason.com/2023/09/24/californias-10-round-magazine-limit-is-unconstitutional-a-federal-judge-rules-again/ Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) vetoed California Bill AB957 which would have required state judges to guarantee parents are open to “gender affirmation” care for their children when deciding custody battles. Is Newsom's move towards moderation an indication that he's planning to run for president in 2024? Dave McCormick—Republican Candidate for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania & former Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs during the George W. Bush Administration—joins The Rich Zeoli Show to talk about his campaign and how Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (D-PA) has voted with President Joe Biden's agenda 98% of the time. You can learn more about his campaign here: https://www.davemccormickpa.com
The Voice of a Nation [malcolm at eight] – Navigating the tangled web of the U.S. government's current state, this piece delves into the erosion of checks and balances, while spotlighting upcoming Supreme Court cases that could redefine our legal landscape. From controversial Trump trademarks to landmark decisions like Bruen, we explore the uneasy coexistence of politics, law, and constitutional integrity. Witness the courts'...
Today it's just you and me as we discuss the hot news of the day from around the country. We'll take calls and do some Q&A as we talk about Hunter, Jacksonville, Bruen and more. Then we'll finish up, as usual, with our weekend entertainment review with Willie Waffle.
Should NJ firearms retailers and wholesalers have insurance? Will they be able to afford it? We bring back our friend, Rick Lindsey from XInsurance to discuss the current situation in the People's Republik of New Jersey. Who will protect your children while they are in school from evil monsters? During our SOTG Homeroom from CrossBreed Holsters, we consider who is best suited to be dangerous on demand. What is a “doober” and how should you secure one to your rifle? For our Brownells Bullet Points segment, we will consider the importance of properly securing add-ons and accessories to your guns. Thanks for being a part of SOTG! We hope you find value in the message we share. If you've got any questions, here are some options to contact us: Send an Email Send a Text Call Us Enjoy the show! And remember… You're a Beginner Once, a Student For Life! TOPICS COVERED THIS EPISODE Galco SLC Strap available on ShopSOTG.com Huge thanks to our Partners: Brownells | Crossbreed Holsters | FrogLube | Hi-Point Firearms [0:02:30] Brownells Bullet Points - Brownells.com TOPIC: Hardware Discussion: Loctite your Doobers or they will fall off at the worst possible time [0:24:45] SOTG Homeroom - CrossbreedHolsters.com TOPIC: Christian School Security: Volunteers or Hired-Guns? Knights of St. Nicholas: https://amzn.to/3sI8Rxv [0:51:18] Should NJ gun companies have Insurance? Featuring Rick J. Lindsey New Jersey can sue gun companies under public nuisance law, federal appeals panel rules www.politico.com/news XINSURANCE Official Website - www.xinsurance.com FEATURING: Rick J. Lindsey, Xinsurance, Politico, Madison Rising, Jarrad Markel, Paul Markel, SOTG University PARTNERS: Brownells Inc, Crossbreed Holsters, FrogLube, Hi-Point Firearms FIND US ON: Juxxi, MeWe.com, Gettr, iTunes, Stitcher, AppleTV, Roku, Amazon, GooglePlay, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, tumblr SOURCES From www.politico.com/news: New Jersey can sue the gun industry under a “public nuisance” law, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday, handing a major victory to the state after last year's U.S. Supreme Court decision loosening public carrying restrictions. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals' dismissal of a challenge brought by the National Shooting Sports Foundation last year comes as New Jersey and other states look for novel ways to balance public safety with gun rights under the high court's June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. New Jersey's public nuisance law, signed by Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy a month later, may offer a template to other states following Thursday's ruling, which said the shooting foundation “jumped the gun” in its challenge and did not justify the court's intervention. Other blue states, such as Delaware and California, have enacted similar measures designed to open the gun industry to legal action. (Click Here for Full Article)
In This Hour: -- State attorneys general sue Maryland over its post-Bruen tantrum law restricting concealed carry. Montana AG Austin Knudsen explains the action. -- New lawsuit against NRA might be able to break up the leadership. David Del Aquila leads the lawsuit. -- Before there were screw-in choke tubes, shotgunners had the Polychoke. Tom Gresham's Gun Talk 09.03.23 Hour 3
The People's Republik of New Jersey has attacked lawful commerce again with a backdoor gun control scheme that allows them to sue gun companies when criminals use guns. Will the firearms industry fight this or just lie down and comply? During our Brownells Bullet Points, we will consider more hardware; rifles and optics. The Professor installed an MPO scope onto a .260 Remington chambered rifle. Also, for your SOTG Homeroom from CrossBreed Holsters, we will consider a new organization; The Rittenhouse Foundation. What is that all about? Thanks for being a part of SOTG! We hope you find value in the message we share. If you've got any questions, here are some options to contact us: Send an Email Send a Text Call Us Enjoy the show! And remember… You're a Beginner Once, a Student For Life! TOPICS COVERED THIS EPISODE [0:03:00] YEET Cannon is Out of Stock! Huge thanks to our Partners: Brownells | Crossbreed Holsters | FrogLube | Hi-Point Firearms [0:09:46] Brownells Bullet Points - Brownells.com TOPIC: MPO on a Savage Model 11 .260 Remington - Geeking Out with Rifle Cartridges [0:30:46] Good Reading: AK47 Survival and Evolution of the World's Most Prolific Gun amzn.to/3sd0qK7 [0:56:33] SOTG Homeroom - CrossbreedHolsters.com TOPIC: Kyle Rittenhouse Starts Up a New Gun Rights Org Focused on Supporting Individuals Who Have Defended Themselves www.thetruthaboutguns.com [1:06:23] New Jersey can sue gun companies under public nuisance law, federal appeals panel rules www.politico.com/news/2023/ FEATURING: The Truth About Guns, Politico, Madison Rising, Jarrad Markel, Paul Markel, SOTG University PARTNERS: Brownells Inc, Crossbreed Holsters, FrogLube, Hi-Point Firearms FIND US ON: Juxxi, MeWe.com, Gettr, iTunes, Stitcher, AppleTV, Roku, Amazon, GooglePlay, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, tumblr SOURCES From www.politico.com/news/2023: New Jersey can sue the gun industry under a “public nuisance” law, a federal appeals court ruled Thursday, handing a major victory to the state after last year's U.S. Supreme Court decision loosening public carrying restrictions. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals' dismissal of a challenge brought by the National Shooting Sports Foundation last year comes as New Jersey and other states look for novel ways to balance public safety with gun rights under the high court's June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. New Jersey's public nuisance law, signed by Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy a month later, may offer a template to other states following Thursday's ruling, which said the shooting foundation “jumped the gun” in its challenge and did not justify the court's intervention. Other blue states, such as Delaware and California, have enacted similar measures designed to open the gun industry to legal action. (Click Here for Full Article)
Two blockbuster cases came down in June of 2022. The Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen substantially expanded Second Amendment rights and limited the power of states to regulate concealed carry of firearms. Bruen affected thousands of Americans who have had their laws overturned and radically changed the method by which federal judges evaluate firearms law. Two remarkable scholars of the Second Amendment and firearms law explain how law makers, law enforcers, and federal courts have responded. They discuss differences among the conservative justices that produced this fragile holding, the growing dependence on history but disdain for historians, how the Bruen approach hurts laws involving domestic violence or controlled substances, the problem of overreading historical silences, and the ways violence may be addressed through community violence intervention, free markets, etc. – in ways SCOTUS cannot control. Jacob Charles is an Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine Caruso School of Law – a constitutional law scholar focusing on the Second Amendment and firearms law. Before joining the faculty Pepperdine, he served as the inaugural executive director of the Center for Firearms Law at Duke University School of Law. He has a terrific new piece coming out in the Duke Law Journal called “The Dead Hand of a Silent Past: Bruen, Gun Rights, and the Shackles of History.” Jake combines ambitious academic scholarship in law journals with public facing work for outlets such as the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Slate, The Hill, Bloomberg Law, and other outlets. Besides being a great friend to this podcast, he has been quoted in the New York Times, CNN, and NPR. Dru Stevenson is the Wayne Fischer Research Professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. Professor Stevenson joined the faculty in 2003 after a law career that included practicing as a Legal Aid lawyer in Connecticut and serving as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Connecticut. His publications cover topics ranging from criminal law to civil procedure, with an emphasis on the intersection of law with economics and linguistic theory. His articles have been cited in leading academic journals and treatises, by federal and state appellate courts, and in recent briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court. Professor Stevenson's current research focus is firearm law and policy. His “Revisiting the Original Congressional Debates About the Second Amendment” provides a missing analyses of the debates, situating each statement in Congress within the context of the speaker's background and political stances on issues overlapping with the right to keep and bear arms. Susan Liebell is a Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science
Two blockbuster cases came down in June of 2022. The Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen substantially expanded Second Amendment rights and limited the power of states to regulate concealed carry of firearms. Bruen affected thousands of Americans who have had their laws overturned and radically changed the method by which federal judges evaluate firearms law. Two remarkable scholars of the Second Amendment and firearms law explain how law makers, law enforcers, and federal courts have responded. They discuss differences among the conservative justices that produced this fragile holding, the growing dependence on history but disdain for historians, how the Bruen approach hurts laws involving domestic violence or controlled substances, the problem of overreading historical silences, and the ways violence may be addressed through community violence intervention, free markets, etc. – in ways SCOTUS cannot control. Jacob Charles is an Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine Caruso School of Law – a constitutional law scholar focusing on the Second Amendment and firearms law. Before joining the faculty Pepperdine, he served as the inaugural executive director of the Center for Firearms Law at Duke University School of Law. He has a terrific new piece coming out in the Duke Law Journal called “The Dead Hand of a Silent Past: Bruen, Gun Rights, and the Shackles of History.” Jake combines ambitious academic scholarship in law journals with public facing work for outlets such as the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Slate, The Hill, Bloomberg Law, and other outlets. Besides being a great friend to this podcast, he has been quoted in the New York Times, CNN, and NPR. Dru Stevenson is the Wayne Fischer Research Professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. Professor Stevenson joined the faculty in 2003 after a law career that included practicing as a Legal Aid lawyer in Connecticut and serving as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Connecticut. His publications cover topics ranging from criminal law to civil procedure, with an emphasis on the intersection of law with economics and linguistic theory. His articles have been cited in leading academic journals and treatises, by federal and state appellate courts, and in recent briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court. Professor Stevenson's current research focus is firearm law and policy. His “Revisiting the Original Congressional Debates About the Second Amendment” provides a missing analyses of the debates, situating each statement in Congress within the context of the speaker's background and political stances on issues overlapping with the right to keep and bear arms. Susan Liebell is a Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. 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
Two blockbuster cases came down in June of 2022. The Dobbs decision overturned Roe v. Wade and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen substantially expanded Second Amendment rights and limited the power of states to regulate concealed carry of firearms. Bruen affected thousands of Americans who have had their laws overturned and radically changed the method by which federal judges evaluate firearms law. Two remarkable scholars of the Second Amendment and firearms law explain how law makers, law enforcers, and federal courts have responded. They discuss differences among the conservative justices that produced this fragile holding, the growing dependence on history but disdain for historians, how the Bruen approach hurts laws involving domestic violence or controlled substances, the problem of overreading historical silences, and the ways violence may be addressed through community violence intervention, free markets, etc. – in ways SCOTUS cannot control. Jacob Charles is an Associate Professor of Law, Pepperdine Caruso School of Law – a constitutional law scholar focusing on the Second Amendment and firearms law. Before joining the faculty Pepperdine, he served as the inaugural executive director of the Center for Firearms Law at Duke University School of Law. He has a terrific new piece coming out in the Duke Law Journal called “The Dead Hand of a Silent Past: Bruen, Gun Rights, and the Shackles of History.” Jake combines ambitious academic scholarship in law journals with public facing work for outlets such as the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Slate, The Hill, Bloomberg Law, and other outlets. Besides being a great friend to this podcast, he has been quoted in the New York Times, CNN, and NPR. Dru Stevenson is the Wayne Fischer Research Professor at South Texas College of Law Houston. Professor Stevenson joined the faculty in 2003 after a law career that included practicing as a Legal Aid lawyer in Connecticut and serving as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Connecticut. His publications cover topics ranging from criminal law to civil procedure, with an emphasis on the intersection of law with economics and linguistic theory. His articles have been cited in leading academic journals and treatises, by federal and state appellate courts, and in recent briefs to the U.S. Supreme Court. Professor Stevenson's current research focus is firearm law and policy. His “Revisiting the Original Congressional Debates About the Second Amendment” provides a missing analyses of the debates, situating each statement in Congress within the context of the speaker's background and political stances on issues overlapping with the right to keep and bear arms. Susan Liebell is a Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies
It has been a little while since we've done a Q&A podcast. So, we decided to take some questions from Reload Members for this week's episode. And we got a lot of great questions. I'm not sure if buying a Reload Membership makes somebody smarter or if only smart people buy Reload Memberships, but, either way, we always seem to get really great questions during these Q&As. This time was no different. We received shrewd questions on a variety of topics. Lots of members wanted to know about the timing of many of the gun cases that have made their way up the federal court system since Bruen was handed down last year. They also wanted to know what cases the Supreme Court is likely to take up. Will SCOTUS accept one of the "assault weapons" ban cases? What about the pistol brace ban? Also, what's going on with weed and guns? Where is that combination from a legal standpoint? And what are we seeing from all those new gun owners that have come into the fold over the last few years? Are the predictions of their huge impact panning out? How can we even tell? There were lots of other great questions too. So, make sure you listen to the full show.
The West Coast's largest Second Amendment Celebration is coming up on September 16, 2023 in San Diego! Get your tickets at https://gunprom.com. Gun Owners Radio is expanding our marketing & advertising services! If you need help connecting with your customers, contact us! https://gunownersradio.com/marketing-services John Crump shares the latest updates on the gag order filed against him by AUSA Laura Cofer Taylor in the autokeycard case. https://www.youtube.com/johncrumpnews The San Diego Gun Show will be returning on October 21 & 22, 2023, featuring more guns and more vendors! The Gun Owners Symposium will also be returning with more speakers talking on topics just for gun owners. SDCGO helps win an important Second Amendment knife ban case in Hawaii. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/hawaii-butterfly-knife-ban-violates-second-amendment-court-says Should people that use substances like drugs or alcohol have their Second Amendment rights taken away? https://sdcgo.org/join With the Bruen case, the number of CCW holders have been skyrocketing. So have the numbers of CCW instructors. How do you know if you're getting the proper training? STUMP MY NEPHEW: What is the world's oldest surviving firearm? — Like, subscribe, and share to help restore the Second Amendment in California! Make sure Big Tech can't censor your access to our content and subscribe to our email list: https://gunownersradio.com/subscribe #2a #guns #gunowners #2ndAmendment #2ACA #ca42a #gunownersradio #gunrights #gunownersrights #rkba #shallnotbeinfringed #pewpew — The right to self-defense is a basic human right. Gun ownership is an integral part of that right. If you want to keep your Second Amendment rights, defend them by joining San Diego County Gun Owners (SDCGO), Orange County Gun Owners (OCGO), or Inland Empire Gun Owners (IEGO). Support the cause by listening to Gun Owners Radio live on Sunday afternoon or on any podcast app at your leisure. Together we will win. https://www.sandiegocountygunowners.com https://orangecountygunowners.com http://inlandempiregunowners.com https://www.firearmspolicy.org https://www.gunownersca.com https://gunowners.org Show your support for Gun Owners Radio sponsors! Get expert legal advice on any firearm-related issues: https://dillonlawgp.com Smarter web development and digital marketing help: https://www.sagetree.com Learn to FLY at SDFTI! San Diego Flight Training International: https://sdfti.com Protect your retirement with precious metals! Call GoldCo Today! 855-612-6354
Discussing the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the overall effect of Bruen with Writer Dean Weingarten. Lock N Load is presented by; Aero Precision https://aeroprecisionusa.com Modern Gun School https://mgs.edu Ace Firearms http://www.acefirearms.com DeSantis Holsters https://www.desantisholster.com Staccato http://staccato2011.com Taran Tactical Innovations https://tarantacticalinnovations.com Spikes Tactical https://www.spikestactical.com Chambers Custom https://chamberscustom.com/ Federal Ammunition https://www.federalpremium.com/ Primary Arms https://www.primaryarms.com/
Discussing the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the overall effect of Bruen with Writer Dean Weingarten.Lock N Load is presented by; Aero Precisionhttps://aeroprecisionusa.comModern Gun Schoolhttps://mgs.edu Ace Firearmshttp://www.acefirearms.comDeSantis Holstershttps://www.desantisholster.comStaccatohttp://staccato2011.comTaran Tactical Innovationshttps://tarantacticalinnovations.comSpikes Tacticalhttps://www.spikestactical.comChambers Customhttps://chamberscustom.com/Federal Ammunitionhttps://www.federalpremium.com/Primary Armshttps://www.primaryarms.com/
Discussing the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the overall effect of Bruen with Writer Dean Weingarten.Lock N Load is presented by; Aero Precisionhttps://aeroprecisionusa.comModern Gun Schoolhttps://mgs.edu Ace Firearmshttp://www.acefirearms.comDeSantis Holstershttps://www.desantisholster.comStaccatohttp://staccato2011.comTaran Tactical Innovationshttps://tarantacticalinnovations.comSpikes Tacticalhttps://www.spikestactical.comChambers Customhttps://chamberscustom.com/Federal Ammunitionhttps://www.federalpremium.com/Primary Armshttps://www.primaryarms.com/
This week, we're talking with one of the most prolific independent gun litigators in the country. Alan Beck set about successfully undoing the country's stun gun bans in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2016 Caetano ruling. He also challenged Hawaii's effective ban on gun carry in Young. Now, he's back taking on the Aloha State's strict gun laws in the wake of 2022's Bruen. And he's winning. This week alone he notched victories in two different cases against Hawaii. First, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled the state's total ban on butterfly knives violates the Second Amendment. Then a federal judge appointed by Barack Obama found Hawaii's post-Bruen "sensitive places" gun-carry restrictions, including in restaurants, also run afoul of the Second Amendment. Beck explains the ins and outs of those rulings as well as their significant implications for future cases in Hawaii and beyond. Then he describes a new suit he just filed against a Hawaii county trying to force concealed-carry permit applicants to waive nearly all of their privacy rights, including what they've told their lawyers or even priests. Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss the Supreme Court's intervention into the "ghost gun" case. Special Guest: Alan Beck.
Welcome to the Sunday edition of Talk Law Radio. Today we will dive deep into the details of a court case. Called NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSN., INC. v. BRUEN, a United States Supreme Court case that determined a New York law was unconstitutional because it infringed on the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The reason the Bruen case is important is because the analysis from Bruen will be used to determine whether the ATF can change the definition of terms to restrict the purchase of firearms. This episode follows a show where I discuss new legal challenges regarding the ATF's change to definitions that restrict the purchase of certain firearms. Search for the August 12th episode to hear the rest of the story. Tune in to KLUP 930 AM radio to discover your legal issue blind spots or search www.TalkLawRadio.com. Also watch Facebook Live and YouTube. Follow and subscribe so that you know when new episodes are posted. Attorney Todd Marquardt brings you insightful topics every Saturday morning, but he's not stopping there! Join Todd every Sunday afternoon at 4:30pm for a special bonus segment! He addresses unique topics in more detail with a professional perspective. So what are you waiting for? Discover your hidden legal blind spots by listening to all the impactful Talk Law content every weekend!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
This week Lloyd shares his thoughts on a recent ruling from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Just as Hunter Biden's sweetheart deal falls through the Fifth Circuit, based on SCOTUS's ruling in Bruen, basically invalidates the gun charges against Hunter Biden. Coincidence? Armed Lutheran Radio is a listener-supported podcast. If you value the information and entertainment we provide, consider supporting the show by joining our membership site, The Reformation Gun Club! http://gunclub.armedlutheran.us Thank You to this Week's Members! Derek from Huntsville, AL John Nielson Luke from Seymour, IN Jerry and Billye from Deer Lodge, MT Donny from White Bear Lake, MN Dan from Enumclaw, WA Robert from Monroe, GA Austin from Dysart, IA Steve from Vernon, TX and Paul J from McKinney, TX Check Out the New Books now Available! Check out "Duty to Defend: Volume 2" and our newest book, for young readers, "The Fifth Command," in paperback, Kindle, or ePub formats! www.ArmedLutheran.us/books Prayer of the Week O God, as You declare Your almighty power above all in showing mercy and pity, mercifully grant unto us such a measure of Your grace that we may obtain Your gracious promises and be made partakers of Your heavenly treasures; through Jesus Christ, Your Son, our Lord. Amen. Use these Links to Support Armed Lutheran Radio Armed Lutheran Radio is a listener-supported podcast. If you value the information and entertainment we provide, consider supporting the show by joining our membership site, or shopping at your favorite online stores using the links below. Join the Reformation Gun Club! - http://gunclub.armedlutheran.us Check out the other Great Armed Lutheran Books - http://www.ArmedLutheran.us/Books Shop at Amazon* - http://www.armedlutheran.us/amazon Shop at GunMagWarehouse* - http://www.armedlutheran.us/mags Get Regular Refills Coffee Subscriptions at Dunkin' Donuts* - www.ArmedLutheran.us/Coffee Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network - https://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org Get in Touch Visit our Feedback Page - http://www.armedlutheran.us/feedback Please tell your friends about us, leave an iTunes review, and like us on Facebook Join our Facebook group - http://www.armedlutheran.us/facebook Subscribe to us and follow us on Youtube - http://www.armedlutheran.us/youtube Check Out More at our Website- http://www.armedlutheran.us Disclaimer The links above which are indicated with an asterisk (*) are affiliate links, which means that if you choose to make a purchase, I will earn a commission. This commission comes at no additional cost to you. Please understand that I have experience with all of these items, and I recommend them because they are helpful and useful, not because of the small commissions I make if you decide to buy something. Please do not spend any money on these products unless you feel you need them or that they will help you. Original Music Music performed by the Artist formerly known as METALloyd, copyright 2023. Keep Shooting, Keep Praying, We'll Talk to you Next time!
A recipient of the Presidential Citizens Medal for her “exemplary public service to advance free and fair elections,” Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson joins us for the latest episode of TAG. From armed protestors outside her home in the middle of the night contesting the 2020 election results and learning of a plot published on Facebook to shoot her in her backyard to her efforts to institute a ban on guns within 100 feet of polling places, Secretary Benson shares first-hand how gun safety interfaces with elections. We also discuss the impact of the Michigan State University and Oxford High School shootings on legislation and Gen Z. In the latest edition of Siegel's Scope, Dr. Siegel unpacks the post-Bruen federal district court decision from Oregon – which upheld the state's ban on large capacity ammunition magazines – and its potential ramifications on the upcoming Supreme Court case regarding gun restrictions for the subjects of domestic violence restraining orders.Host: Mathew LittmanGuest: Jocelyn BensonProducer: Ernesto ChavezvaldiviaExecutive Producer: Adria MárquezEditor: Stephanie Genuardi Cunnane
Discussing the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the overall effect of Bruen with Writer Dean Weingarten. Lock N Load is presented by; Aero Precision https://aeroprecisionusa.com Modern Gun School https://mgs.edu Ace Firearms http://www.acefirearms.com DeSantis Holsters https://www.desantisholster.com Staccato http://staccato2011.com Taran Tactical Innovations https://tarantacticalinnovations.com Spikes Tactical https://www.spikestactical.com Chambers Custom https://chamberscustom.com/ Federal Ammunition https://www.federalpremium.com/ Primary Arms https://www.primaryarms.com/
Discussing the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the overall effect of Bruen with Writer Dean Weingarten.Lock N Load is presented by; Aero Precisionhttps://aeroprecisionusa.comModern Gun Schoolhttps://mgs.edu Ace Firearmshttp://www.acefirearms.comDeSantis Holstershttps://www.desantisholster.comStaccatohttp://staccato2011.comTaran Tactical Innovationshttps://tarantacticalinnovations.comSpikes Tacticalhttps://www.spikestactical.comChambers Customhttps://chamberscustom.com/Federal Ammunitionhttps://www.federalpremium.com/Primary Armshttps://www.primaryarms.com/
Discussing the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the overall effect of Bruen with Writer Dean Weingarten.Lock N Load is presented by; Aero Precisionhttps://aeroprecisionusa.comModern Gun Schoolhttps://mgs.edu Ace Firearmshttp://www.acefirearms.comDeSantis Holstershttps://www.desantisholster.comStaccatohttp://staccato2011.comTaran Tactical Innovationshttps://tarantacticalinnovations.comSpikes Tacticalhttps://www.spikestactical.comChambers Customhttps://chamberscustom.com/Federal Ammunitionhttps://www.federalpremium.com/Primary Armshttps://www.primaryarms.com/
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 7 of 7 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen. This part 6 of the reading of Bruen covers the second half of the dissenting opinion written by Justice Breyer, with Justices Kagan and Sotomayor concurring.Bruen is the seminal 2022 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Clarence Thomas extending Heller's (2008) holding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to FEDERAL government, as well as McDonald's (2010) holding that the 2A right also applied to the STATES, to hold that the 2A also protected the right to keep and bear arms outside the home, in public.As a result, the New York state law requiring a showing a special need for public carry of a firearm that was challenged by NYSRPA was ruled unconstitutional, thus rendering essentially all "may issue" concealed carry regimes unconstitutional.This reading of Bruen is the entirety of the decision, both majority by Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch, as well as concurrences by Justices Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Alito,and also the dissent by Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. (Bruen was a 6 to 3 decision.)As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.Prior this starting this reading of Bruen I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller (which found that the 2A was an INDIVIDUAL right with respect ot the FEDERAL government), as well as the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald (which found that the 2A also applied to the STATES).You can read the entirety the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision here:lawofselfdefense.com/bruenEnjoy! #BruenBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/conlawLAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 6 of 7 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen. This part 6 of the reading of Bruen covers the first half of the dissenting opinion written by Justice Breyer, with Justices Kagan and Sotomayor concurring.Bruen is the seminal 2022 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Clarence Thomas extending Heller's (2008) holding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to FEDERAL government, as well as McDonald's (2010) holding that the 2A right also applied to the STATES, to hold that the 2A also protected the right to keep and bear arms outside the home, in public.As a result, the New York state law requiring a showing a special need for public carry of a firearm that was challenged by NYSRPA was ruled unconstitutional, thus rendering essentially all "may issue" concealed carry regimes unconstitutional.This reading of Bruen is the entirety of the decision, both majority by Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch, as well as concurrences by Justices Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Alito,and also the dissent by Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. (Bruen was a 6 to 3 decision.)As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.Prior this starting this reading of Bruen I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller (which found that the 2A was an INDIVIDUAL right with respect ot the FEDERAL government), as well as the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald (which found that the 2A also applied to the STATES).You can read the entirety the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision here:lawofselfdefense.com/bruenEnjoy! #BruenBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/conlawLAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-
In this episode, a panel of libertarian and conservative scholars—J. Joel Alicea of the Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law, Anastasia Boden of the Cato Institute, and Sherif Girgis of Notre Dame Law School—explore the different strands of originalism as a constitutional methodology. They also explore the Roberts Court's application of originalism in recent cases, and how originalism intersects with textualism and other interpretive approaches. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. This program was originally streamed live on June 28, 2023. Additional Resources Moore v. Harper (2023) New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen (2023) Grutter v. Bollinger (2002) District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) Counterman v. Colorado (2023) J. Joel Alicea, “The Moral Authority of Original Meaning,” Notre Dame Law Review (2022) Joel Alicea, “Originalism and the Rule of the Dead,” National Affairs (2022) Sherif Girgis, “Living Traditionalism,” N.Y.U. L.Rev (2023) Sherif Gergis, “Dobb's History and the future of Abortion Laws,” SCOTUSblog (2022) Anastasia Boden, “Supreme Court's Sidestep Leaves Native Kids Without Answers,” Volokh Conspiracy (June 2023) Anastasia Boden, “Discourse: Irrational Basis,” Pacific Legal Foundation, (August 2022) Stay Connected and Learn More Continue the conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. Please subscribe to Live at the National Constitution Center and our companion podcast We the People on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app.
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 5 of 7 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen. This part 5 of the reading of Bruen covers the concurrence opinions by Justices Alito, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.Bruen is the seminal 2022 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Clarence Thomas extending Heller's (2008) holding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to FEDERAL government, as well as McDonald's (2010) holding that the 2A right also applied to the STATES, to hold that the 2A also protected the right to keep and bear arms outside the home, in public.As a result, the New York state law requiring a showing a special need for public carry of a firearm that was challenged by NYSRPA was ruled unconstitutional, thus rendering essentially all "may issue" concealed carry regimes unconstitutional.This reading of Bruen is the entirety of the decision, both majority by Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch, as well as concurrences by Justices Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Alito,and also the dissent by Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. (Bruen was a 6 to 3 decision.)As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.Prior this starting this reading of Bruen I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller (which found that the 2A was an INDIVIDUAL right with respect ot the FEDERAL government), as well as the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald (which found that the 2A also applied to the STATES).You can read the entirety the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision here:lawofselfdefense.com/bruenEnjoy! #BruenBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/conlawLAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 4 of 7 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen.Bruen is the seminal 2022 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Clarence Thomas extending Heller's (2008) holding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to FEDERAL government, as well as McDonald's (2010) holding that the 2A right also applied to the STATES, to hold that the 2A also protected the right to keep and bear arms outside the home, in public.As a result, the New York state law requiring a showing a special need for public carry of a firearm that was challenged by NYSRPA was ruled unconstitutional, thus rendering essentially all "may issue" concealed carry regimes unconstitutional.This reading of Bruen is the entirety of the decision, both majority by Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch, as well as concurrences by Justices Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Alito,and also the dissent by Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. (Bruen was a 6 to 3 decision.)As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.Prior this starting this reading of Bruen I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller (which found that the 2A was an INDIVIDUAL right with respect ot the FEDERAL government), as well as the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald (which found that the 2A also applied to the STATES).You can read the entirety the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision here:lawofselfdefense.com/bruenEnjoy! #BruenBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/conlawLAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of Self Defense"https://youtube.com/lawofselfdefenseFREE BOOK! “The&
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 3 of 7 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen.Bruen is the seminal 2022 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Clarence Thomas extending Heller's (2008) holding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to FEDERAL government, as well as McDonald's (2010) holding that the 2A right also applied to the STATES, to hold that the 2A also protected the right to keep and bear arms outside the home, in public.As a result, the New York state law requiring a showing a special need for public carry of a firearm that was challenged by NYSRPA was ruled unconstitutional, thus rendering essentially all "may issue" concealed carry regimes unconstitutional.This reading of Bruen is the entirety of the decision, both majority by Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch, as well as concurrences by Justices Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Alito,and also the dissent by Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. (Bruen was a 6 to 3 decision.)As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.Prior this starting this reading of Bruen I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller (which found that the 2A was an INDIVIDUAL right with respect ot the FEDERAL government), as well as the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald (which found that the 2A also applied to the STATES).You can read the entirety the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision here:lawofselfdefense.com/bruenEnjoy! #BruenBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/conlawLAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of Self Defense"https://youtube.com/lawofselfdefenseFREE BOOK! “The&
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 2 of 7 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen.Bruen is the seminal 2022 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Clarence Thomas extending Heller's (2008) holding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to FEDERAL government, as well as McDonald's (2010) holding that the 2A right also applied to the STATES, to hold that the 2A also protected the right to keep and bear arms outside the home, in public.As a result, the New York state law requiring a showing a special need for public carry of a firearm that was challenged by NYSRPA was ruled unconstitutional, thus rendering essentially all "may issue" concealed carry regimes unconstitutional.This reading of Bruen is the entirety of the decision, both majority by Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch, as well as concurrences by Justices Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Alito,and also the dissent by Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. (Bruen was a 6 to 3 decision.)As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.Prior this starting this reading of Bruen I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller (which found that the 2A was an INDIVIDUAL right with respect ot the FEDERAL government), as well as the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald (which found that the 2A also applied to the STATES).You can read the entirety the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision here:lawofselfdefense.com/bruenEnjoy! #BruenBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/conlawLAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of Self Defense"https://youtube.com/lawofselfdefenseFREE BOOK! “The&
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 1 of 7 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association (NYSRPA) v. Bruen.Bruen is the seminal 2022 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Clarence Thomas extending Heller's (2008) holding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to FEDERAL government, as well as McDonald's (2010) holding that the 2A right also applied to the STATES, to hold that the 2A also protected the right to keep and bear arms outside the home, in public.As a result, the New York state law requiring a showing a special need for public carry of a firearm that was challenged by NYSRPA was ruled unconstitutional, thus rendering essentially all "may issue" concealed carry regimes unconstitutional.This reading of Bruen is the entirety of the decision, both majority by Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Gorsuch, as well as concurrences by Justices Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Alito,and also the dissent by Justice Breyer, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. (Bruen was a 6 to 3 decision.)As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.As a result, this very lengthy reading is divided into seven manageable portions--the first four of which are Justice Thomas' majority opinion.Prior this starting this reading of Bruen I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller (which found that the 2A was an INDIVIDUAL right with respect ot the FEDERAL government), as well as the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald (which found that the 2A also applied to the STATES).You can read the entirety the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision here:lawofselfdefense.com/bruenEnjoy! #BruenBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/conlawLAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of Self Defense"https://youtube.com/lawofselfdefenseFREE BOOK! “The
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 2 of 2 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald v. Chicago.McDonald is the seminal 2010 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Samuel Alito extending the finding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to the STATES and not merely to the Federal government (extending the finding of the 2008 Heller decision against the Federal government, written by Justice Scalia, which I read here).As a result, the then-existing laws of Chicago and nearby Oak Park effectively prohibiting the ownership by American citizens of handguns in the home was deemed unconstitutional.Prior this reading of McDonald I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller, and I will follow McDonald with a reading of the 2022 decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc. v. Bruen (2022) (entire decision, 7-part reading), which applies the Second Amendment outside the home.You can read the entirety the DC v. McDonald decision here: https://lawofselfdefense.com/mcdonaldEnjoy! #McDonaldBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/LAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of Self Defense"https://youtube.com/lawofselfdefenseFREE BOOK! “The Law of Self Defense: Principles”Physical book, 200+ pages, we just ask that you cover the S&H:http://lawofselfdefense.com/freebookFREE 5-ELEMENTS OF SELF-DEFENSE LAW CHEAT SHEET!Totally free cheat sheet explaining the 5-elements of any claim of self-defense.If you don't understand these five elements you have no idea what legally qualifies as lawful self-defense.PDF download, zero cost:http://lawofselfdefense.com/elementsDisclaimer - Content is for educational purpose only.Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes
In today's show Attorney Andrew Branca begins a reading of part 1 of 2 of the 2010 US Supreme Court decision of McDonald v. Chicago.McDonald is the seminal 2010 Supreme Court decision written by the Justice Samuel Alito extending the finding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right to apply to the STATES and not merely to the Federal government (extending the finding of the 2008 Heller decision against the Federal government, written by Justice Scalia, which I read here).As a result, the then-existing laws of Chicago and nearby Oak Park effectively prohibiting the ownership by American citizens of handguns in the home was deemed unconstitutional.Prior this reading of McDonald I had already read the 2008 US Supreme Court majority decision of Heller, and I will follow McDonald with a reading of the 2022 decision of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assoc. v. Bruen (2022) (entire decision, 7-part reading), which applies the Second Amendment outside the home.You can read the entirety the DC v. McDonald decision here: https://lawofselfdefense.com/mcdonaldEnjoy! #McDonaldBecome a Law of Self Defense Member for JUST 99 CENTS!Not yet a Law of Self Defense Member? WHY NOT? Try our two-week trial membership, unlimited access to our show content, for just 99¢! Stay a member after that and it's still just ~30¢ a day, less than $10 a month! Get the 99¢ trial membership by clicking on the image or link below:https://lawofselfdefense.com/trialBecome a Platinum Member for ONLY 82 CENTS A DAY!PLUS get EVERY class & book we offer, for FREE!We ONLY consult on legal cases for our Platinum members!BE HARD TO CONVICT, become a Law of Self Defense Platinum member TODAY!http://lawofselfdefense.com/82centsAMERICAN LAW COURSESGet a law-school level education in typical first-year (1L) law classes, including criminal law, constitutional law, evidence, property, and more, at a fraction of the cost and time of law school, and without any of the political toxicity of today's law schools. Spring semester starts soon with Constitutional Law!Learn more at: americanlawcourses.comamericanlawcourses.com/LAW CARDS!https://www.lawofselfdefense.com/lawcardsSUBSCRIBE TO our STANDARD long-form YouTube channel:"Law of Self Defense"https://youtube.com/lawofselfdefenseFREE BOOK! “The Law of Self Defense: Principles”Physical book, 200+ pages, we just ask that you cover the S&H:http://lawofselfdefense.com/freebookFREE 5-ELEMENTS OF SELF-DEFENSE LAW CHEAT SHEET!Totally free cheat sheet explaining the 5-elements of any claim of self-defense.If you don't understand these five elements you have no idea what legally qualifies as lawful self-defense.PDF download, zero cost:http://lawofselfdefense.com/elementsDisclaimer - Content is for educational purpose only.Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes
The Supreme Court recently wrapped up their term – and announced that they will hear a very controversial case about domestic abuse, the power of Congress, and the right to keep and bear arms called United States v. Rahimi. The Court will decide whether a Texas man who assaulted his girlfriend in a parking lot and threatened to shoot her if she told anyone has been deprived of his Second Amendment rights. When the assaulted woman later obtained a restraining order against Mr. Zackey Rahimi, federal law made illegal for him to possess a firearm or ammunition while under that order. In 2019, Mr. Zackey Rahimi had an argument with his girlfriend in a parking lot. Mr. Rahimi knocked the woman to the ground. As he dragged her back to his car, she hit her head on the car's dashboard. Later, in a telephone call. Mr. Rahimi threatened the woman that he would shoot her if she told anyone about the assault. Later, a Texas state court entered a domestic violence restraining order against Rahimi. The order also barred Rahimi from possessing a gun based on a part of a federal statute: the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Mr. Rahimi claims that the statute violates his Second Amendment rights. Postscript invites authors to react to contemporary events that engage their scholarship and we have two experts on the Second Amendment to unpack the case. Joseph Blocher, Lanty L. Smith '67 Professor of Law at Duke University School of Law co-authored The Positive Second Amendment: Rights, Regulation, and the Future of Heller (Cambridge University Press, 2018) with Darrell Miller and has a forthcoming article in the Yale Law Review (co-authored with Eric Ruben) entitled Originalism-by-Analogy and Second Amendment Adjudication. In addition to his numerous influential law review articles and nuanced public facing scholarship in print, radio, and tv, he was one of the attorneys who helped write the brief for the District of C in Heller and he contributed an important brief to New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science
The Supreme Court recently wrapped up their term – and announced that they will hear a very controversial case about domestic abuse, the power of Congress, and the right to keep and bear arms called United States v. Rahimi. The Court will decide whether a Texas man who assaulted his girlfriend in a parking lot and threatened to shoot her if she told anyone has been deprived of his Second Amendment rights. When the assaulted woman later obtained a restraining order against Mr. Zackey Rahimi, federal law made illegal for him to possess a firearm or ammunition while under that order. In 2019, Mr. Zackey Rahimi had an argument with his girlfriend in a parking lot. Mr. Rahimi knocked the woman to the ground. As he dragged her back to his car, she hit her head on the car's dashboard. Later, in a telephone call. Mr. Rahimi threatened the woman that he would shoot her if she told anyone about the assault. Later, a Texas state court entered a domestic violence restraining order against Rahimi. The order also barred Rahimi from possessing a gun based on a part of a federal statute: the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Mr. Rahimi claims that the statute violates his Second Amendment rights. Postscript invites authors to react to contemporary events that engage their scholarship and we have two experts on the Second Amendment to unpack the case. Joseph Blocher, Lanty L. Smith '67 Professor of Law at Duke University School of Law co-authored The Positive Second Amendment: Rights, Regulation, and the Future of Heller (Cambridge University Press, 2018) with Darrell Miller and has a forthcoming article in the Yale Law Review (co-authored with Eric Ruben) entitled Originalism-by-Analogy and Second Amendment Adjudication. In addition to his numerous influential law review articles and nuanced public facing scholarship in print, radio, and tv, he was one of the attorneys who helped write the brief for the District of C in Heller and he contributed an important brief to New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. 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
http://www.mofpodcast.com/https://prepperbroadcasting.com/https://www.facebook.com/matteroffactspodcast/https://www.facebook.com/groups/mofpodcastgroup/https://rumble.com/user/Mofpodcastwww.youtube.com/user/philrabhttps://www.instagram.com/mofpodcasthttps://twitter.com/themofpodcastSupport the showShop at Amazon: http://amzn.to/2ora9riPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/mofpodcastPurchase American Insurgent by Phil Rabalais: https://amzn.to/2FvSLMLShop at MantisX: http://www.mantisx.com/ref?id=173*The views and opinions of guests do not reflect the opinions of Phil Rabalais, Andrew Bobo, or the Matter of Facts Podcast*The MoF boys sit down for quick product review that Phil's testing, then talk about widespread judicial misconduct in the guise of multiple judges ignoring the Bruen decision to target “large capacity” magazines.Matter of Facts is now live-streaming our podcast on YouTube channel, Facebook page, and Rumble. See the links above, join in the live chat, and see the faces behind the voices.Intro and Outro Music by Phil RabalaisAll rights reserved, no commercial or non-commercial use without permission of creator
The Supreme Court recently wrapped up their term – and announced that they will hear a very controversial case about domestic abuse, the power of Congress, and the right to keep and bear arms called United States v. Rahimi. The Court will decide whether a Texas man who assaulted his girlfriend in a parking lot and threatened to shoot her if she told anyone has been deprived of his Second Amendment rights. When the assaulted woman later obtained a restraining order against Mr. Zackey Rahimi, federal law made illegal for him to possess a firearm or ammunition while under that order. In 2019, Mr. Zackey Rahimi had an argument with his girlfriend in a parking lot. Mr. Rahimi knocked the woman to the ground. As he dragged her back to his car, she hit her head on the car's dashboard. Later, in a telephone call. Mr. Rahimi threatened the woman that he would shoot her if she told anyone about the assault. Later, a Texas state court entered a domestic violence restraining order against Rahimi. The order also barred Rahimi from possessing a gun based on a part of a federal statute: the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Mr. Rahimi claims that the statute violates his Second Amendment rights. Postscript invites authors to react to contemporary events that engage their scholarship and we have two experts on the Second Amendment to unpack the case. Joseph Blocher, Lanty L. Smith '67 Professor of Law at Duke University School of Law co-authored The Positive Second Amendment: Rights, Regulation, and the Future of Heller (Cambridge University Press, 2018) with Darrell Miller and has a forthcoming article in the Yale Law Review (co-authored with Eric Ruben) entitled Originalism-by-Analogy and Second Amendment Adjudication. In addition to his numerous influential law review articles and nuanced public facing scholarship in print, radio, and tv, he was one of the attorneys who helped write the brief for the District of C in Heller and he contributed an important brief to New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The Supreme Court recently wrapped up their term – and announced that they will hear a very controversial case about domestic abuse, the power of Congress, and the right to keep and bear arms called United States v. Rahimi. The Court will decide whether a Texas man who assaulted his girlfriend in a parking lot and threatened to shoot her if she told anyone has been deprived of his Second Amendment rights. When the assaulted woman later obtained a restraining order against Mr. Zackey Rahimi, federal law made illegal for him to possess a firearm or ammunition while under that order. In 2019, Mr. Zackey Rahimi had an argument with his girlfriend in a parking lot. Mr. Rahimi knocked the woman to the ground. As he dragged her back to his car, she hit her head on the car's dashboard. Later, in a telephone call. Mr. Rahimi threatened the woman that he would shoot her if she told anyone about the assault. Later, a Texas state court entered a domestic violence restraining order against Rahimi. The order also barred Rahimi from possessing a gun based on a part of a federal statute: the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Mr. Rahimi claims that the statute violates his Second Amendment rights. Postscript invites authors to react to contemporary events that engage their scholarship and we have two experts on the Second Amendment to unpack the case. Joseph Blocher, Lanty L. Smith '67 Professor of Law at Duke University School of Law co-authored The Positive Second Amendment: Rights, Regulation, and the Future of Heller (Cambridge University Press, 2018) with Darrell Miller and has a forthcoming article in the Yale Law Review (co-authored with Eric Ruben) entitled Originalism-by-Analogy and Second Amendment Adjudication. In addition to his numerous influential law review articles and nuanced public facing scholarship in print, radio, and tv, he was one of the attorneys who helped write the brief for the District of C in Heller and he contributed an important brief to New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy
The Supreme Court recently wrapped up their term – and announced that they will hear a very controversial case about domestic abuse, the power of Congress, and the right to keep and bear arms called United States v. Rahimi. The Court will decide whether a Texas man who assaulted his girlfriend in a parking lot and threatened to shoot her if she told anyone has been deprived of his Second Amendment rights. When the assaulted woman later obtained a restraining order against Mr. Zackey Rahimi, federal law made illegal for him to possess a firearm or ammunition while under that order. In 2019, Mr. Zackey Rahimi had an argument with his girlfriend in a parking lot. Mr. Rahimi knocked the woman to the ground. As he dragged her back to his car, she hit her head on the car's dashboard. Later, in a telephone call. Mr. Rahimi threatened the woman that he would shoot her if she told anyone about the assault. Later, a Texas state court entered a domestic violence restraining order against Rahimi. The order also barred Rahimi from possessing a gun based on a part of a federal statute: the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Mr. Rahimi claims that the statute violates his Second Amendment rights. Postscript invites authors to react to contemporary events that engage their scholarship and we have two experts on the Second Amendment to unpack the case. Joseph Blocher, Lanty L. Smith '67 Professor of Law at Duke University School of Law co-authored The Positive Second Amendment: Rights, Regulation, and the Future of Heller (Cambridge University Press, 2018) with Darrell Miller and has a forthcoming article in the Yale Law Review (co-authored with Eric Ruben) entitled Originalism-by-Analogy and Second Amendment Adjudication. In addition to his numerous influential law review articles and nuanced public facing scholarship in print, radio, and tv, he was one of the attorneys who helped write the brief for the District of C in Heller and he contributed an important brief to New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics
The Supreme Court recently wrapped up their term – and announced that they will hear a very controversial case about domestic abuse, the power of Congress, and the right to keep and bear arms called United States v. Rahimi. The Court will decide whether a Texas man who assaulted his girlfriend in a parking lot and threatened to shoot her if she told anyone has been deprived of his Second Amendment rights. When the assaulted woman later obtained a restraining order against Mr. Zackey Rahimi, federal law made illegal for him to possess a firearm or ammunition while under that order. In 2019, Mr. Zackey Rahimi had an argument with his girlfriend in a parking lot. Mr. Rahimi knocked the woman to the ground. As he dragged her back to his car, she hit her head on the car's dashboard. Later, in a telephone call. Mr. Rahimi threatened the woman that he would shoot her if she told anyone about the assault. Later, a Texas state court entered a domestic violence restraining order against Rahimi. The order also barred Rahimi from possessing a gun based on a part of a federal statute: the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Mr. Rahimi claims that the statute violates his Second Amendment rights. Postscript invites authors to react to contemporary events that engage their scholarship and we have two experts on the Second Amendment to unpack the case. Joseph Blocher, Lanty L. Smith '67 Professor of Law at Duke University School of Law co-authored The Positive Second Amendment: Rights, Regulation, and the Future of Heller (Cambridge University Press, 2018) with Darrell Miller and has a forthcoming article in the Yale Law Review (co-authored with Eric Ruben) entitled Originalism-by-Analogy and Second Amendment Adjudication. In addition to his numerous influential law review articles and nuanced public facing scholarship in print, radio, and tv, he was one of the attorneys who helped write the brief for the District of C in Heller and he contributed an important brief to New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Susan Liebell is Dirk Warren '50 Professor of Political Science at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law