Podcasts about new york state rifle pistol association

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

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

This Day in Legal History: Lincoln Signs the Second Confiscation ActOn July 17, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Second Confiscation Act into law, marking a significant legal development during the Civil War. This act allowed for the seizure of property owned by individuals engaged in rebellion against the Union. Unlike previous measures, it did not require due process or provide an opportunity for the accused to defend themselves. The act targeted Confederate supporters, intending to weaken the rebellion by stripping resources from those aiding the Confederate cause. The legislation also declared that enslaved people who escaped from rebel owners or were captured by Union forces would be considered free. This move was a precursor to the Emancipation Proclamation and signaled a shift in Union policy towards a more aggressive stance against slavery. The Second Confiscation Act was controversial, as it raised significant legal and constitutional questions regarding property rights and due process. Critics argued it overstepped executive powers and violated the Fifth Amendment.Despite these concerns, the act was a critical step in undermining the Confederate war effort and advancing the Union's moral and strategic objectives. It reflected the growing commitment of the Lincoln administration to not only preserve the Union but also to end slavery. The Second Confiscation Act thus played a pivotal role in the broader legal and political landscape of the Civil War.President Joe Biden is preparing to introduce proposals for significant Supreme Court reforms, including imposing term limits on justices, who currently serve for life. This marks a notable shift for Biden, who has previously resisted such reforms despite pressure from within his party. The proposals also include an enforceable ethics code for justices and a constitutional amendment to overturn a recent Supreme Court decision granting broad immunity to presidents for official actions.However, these changes are expected to face considerable challenges in becoming law, especially with Congress unlikely to address major legislation before the upcoming election. Biden's proposals come amidst a tight race against former President Donald Trump, who leads in public opinion polls. Congressional Republicans are expected to oppose the reforms, viewing the current conservative Supreme Court as a significant political achievement.The White House has yet to consult with key lawmakers about the plans, and Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has declined to comment. Biden hinted at these proposals in a recent call with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, aiming to garner support after a poor performance in a presidential debate. The Democratic push for Supreme Court reform has grown following several controversial rulings, including the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the rejection of Biden's student loan cancellation plan. Justice Clarence Thomas has also faced scrutiny for not disclosing expensive gifts from conservative donors. The court's decision granting presidential immunity for official acts has further complicated efforts to prosecute Trump. Biden criticized this decision, arguing it contradicts the founders' intentions. In response, Trump accused Democrats of undermining the Supreme Court and interfering in the presidential election. Biden to Propose Supreme Court Reforms, Including Term LimitsBiden seriously considering proposals on Supreme Court term limits, ethics code, AP sources sayFederal prosecutors in Alaska have identified 23 criminal cases with potential conflicts of interest involving former U.S. District Judge Joshua Kindred, who resigned following sexual misconduct allegations. The 9th Circuit Judicial Council reprimanded Kindred for creating a hostile work environment and engaging in an inappropriate relationship with a law clerk. Although the clerk did not work on cases before Kindred, potential conflicts existed in other cases.Bryan Wilson, head of the U.S. Attorney's Office's criminal division, detailed the conflicts in an email to Alaska's federal public defender. These conflicts included interactions between Kindred and several attorneys, such as a senior prosecutor who sent him nude photos and another attorney who exchanged flirtatious texts. These undisclosed conflicts could lead defense lawyers to challenge convictions or sentences from cases Kindred oversaw.The U.S. Attorney's Office had taken steps to mitigate conflicts since late 2022 by notifying the district's chief judge and reassigning cases from Kindred. However, Federal Public Defender Jamie McGrady criticized the office for not disclosing the conflicts sooner and noted that the recusal of Kindred did not eliminate prejudice against defendants. Her office plans to investigate all cases involving attorneys who interacted with Kindred to ensure justice.Former Alaska judge had potential conflicts in 23 cases, prosecutors say | ReutersA federal appeals court ruled that Minnesota's law requiring individuals to be at least 21 to obtain a permit to carry a handgun in public for self-defense is unconstitutional. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the law violated the Second Amendment rights of 18- to 20-year-olds. U.S. Circuit Judge Duane Benton, writing for the panel, emphasized that the Second Amendment does not specify an age limit.The court upheld a previous ruling in favor of the Second Amendment Foundation, the Firearms Policy Coalition, and the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, which had challenged the law. The decision referenced the 2022 Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which set a new standard for evaluating firearm regulations, stating they must align with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.Judge Benton noted that Minnesota failed to show that 18- to 20-year-olds posed specific risks that justified the age restriction. Despite this, the Supreme Court had recently upheld a federal ban on gun possession for individuals under domestic violence restraining orders, indicating that certain modern firearm restrictions could be valid without historical precedent.Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison expressed disappointment with the ruling, arguing it complicates efforts to reduce shootings and enhance public safety. This decision is part of a broader trend of gun rights groups challenging age-based firearm restrictions in various states.Minnesota cannot bar adults under 21 from carrying guns, court rules | ReutersTesla has replaced its long-time law firm, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, with Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr in a California class action antitrust case. This change, noted in court records, comes as Tesla faces allegations of monopolizing the market for vehicle parts and services, which has purportedly led to consumers paying higher prices. The reason for the switch was not disclosed, and neither Tesla nor the involved law firms commented.The class action case saw a significant development in June when a judge refused to dismiss the claims against Tesla. Shortly thereafter, Wilmer attorneys made their debut appearance for Tesla, continuing to deny the plaintiffs' allegations. Tesla and Musk have a history of legal representation by both Cravath and Wilmer in various high-profile cases.Musk is also represented by Cravath in a Delaware lawsuit challenging his $56 billion pay package, a case that faced a setback in January when a judge invalidated the compensation. Despite a shareholder vote in favor of Musk's pay in June, the Delaware litigation continues, with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan recently joining the defense team.Wilmer is defending Tesla in another antitrust lawsuit in New Orleans, where it seeks to overturn a ban on direct-to-consumer car sales. The new Wilmer team for the California case includes partners David Gringer and Ari Holtzblatt, while the departing Cravath team comprised David Marriott and Vanessa Lavely.Tesla swaps law firms in antitrust case as Cravath exits | ReutersThe questioning of former bankruptcy judge David R. Jones, who resigned after revealing a secret relationship with a partner at Texas law firm Jackson Walker, has been postponed. The US Trustee's office is investigating to recover over $13 million in fees Jones approved for Jackson Walker without disclosing the relationship. Chief Judge Eduardo V. Rodriguez of the Houston bankruptcy court is deliberating on whether the questions about Jones' recusal decisions and his relationship with the attorney violate judiciary policy.Jones, who resigned last year, had a relationship with Elizabeth Freeman, who left Jackson Walker in late 2022. The deposition, originally set for July 18, is on hold until Judge Rodriguez determines the appropriateness of the questions. Jones' attorney, Benjamin I. Finestone, argues that questions about Jones' conduct are a distraction and that the focus should be on what Jackson Walker knew about the relationship.Jackson Walker's attorney, Jason Lee Boland, asserts that understanding the timeline of Jones and Freeman's relationship is crucial for defending against the US Trustee's efforts to reclaim the fees. Judge Rodriguez emphasized the complexity of addressing questions about judges' recusal decisions, stating that such decisions should not be publicly questioned. US Trustee attorney Laura Steele argued that Jones' public statements about his recusals allow for relevant inquiries.The case, known as Professional Fee Matters Concerning the Jackson Walker Law Firm, continues as the court navigates the boundaries of questioning a judge's conduct and recusal decisions.Bankruptcy Court Likely to Pare Back Probe into Ex-Judge Romance 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

This Day in Legal History: The Permanent Court of Arbitration is EstablishedOn this day, February 6, 1900, a pivotal moment in the realm of international law unfolded with the establishment of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), marking the inception of the first international tribunal dedicated to resolving disputes among nations. This historic event was precipitated by the ratification of the 1899 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, setting a cornerstone in The Hague, Netherlands. The PCA's creation underscored a global aspiration towards peaceful resolution of conflicts, departing from the traditional reliance on military force and diplomatic pressure.In the years that followed, the PCA's foundational principles and structure were further refined and strengthened by the 1907 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. These conventions collectively laid down the legal framework and procedural norms for international arbitration that continue to guide the PCA's operations.Now, more than a century later, the PCA stands as a testament to the enduring commitment of the international community to the principles of justice, peace, and cooperation. Housed in the iconic Peace Palace in The Hague, the PCA has grown to include 109 member countries, each pledging to resolve their disputes through arbitration rather than warfare.Throughout its history, the PCA has played a crucial role in mediating conflicts that span a wide range of issues, from territorial disputes to environmental concerns, and from maritime law to international investment. Its proceedings and rulings have not only resolved conflicts but have also contributed significantly to the development of international law.Today, as we commemorate the founding of the PCA, it serves as a reminder of the power of diplomacy and the potential for international law to foster a more peaceful and just world. The legacy of the PCA continues to influence contemporary legal thought and practice, reinforcing the importance of dialogue, understanding, and legal arbitration in the international arena.The federal government has notably refrained from commenting on Donald Trump's legal battle to remain on Colorado's 2024 primary ballot, despite previously engaging in Supreme Court cases concerning major political and legal issues. This silence, particularly from the Solicitor General's Office, seems to reflect a cautious approach to avoid involvement in disputes directly affecting presidential election outcomes. Trump's legal team is set to argue that the Colorado Supreme Court incorrectly ruled him disqualified from office due to his actions during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, a decision with significant implications for his eligibility in upcoming primaries.Historically, the federal government's stance in similar high-stakes election cases, such as Bush v. Gore, has been to abstain from taking a position, suggesting a consistent strategy to steer clear of cases with direct political ramifications. Observers and legal experts speculate that the decision to remain silent in Trump's case, like past instances, is driven by the political sensitivity of the matter and the desire to maintain the perception of impartiality in election-related legal challenges. The Solicitor General's role as an educator and policy explainer to the court, coupled with their selective involvement in cases, highlights the nuanced considerations behind the government's engagement in Supreme Court litigation.This careful positioning underscores the complexities of navigating legal disputes that intersect with political dynamics and the constitutional implications of election law. The absence of federal input in Trump's case reflects a broader trend of cautious engagement by the Solicitor General in politically charged cases, emphasizing the delicate balance between legal principles and political considerations in the administration's approach to Supreme Court litigation.US Silence on Trump Ballot Battle Signals Caution Over ElectionThe recent licensing dispute between Universal Music Group and TikTok Inc. highlights the growing complexities introduced by AI-generated music in the music and social media industries. Universal's decision to remove its artists' music from TikTok, citing concerns over AI-generated recordings diluting royalties for human artists, marks a significant standoff that could reshape future negotiations and the use of AI in content creation. This conflict reflects broader industry challenges with AI, mirroring disputes in other creative sectors over copyright infringement and the impact of technology on traditional revenue models.Both Universal and TikTok benefit from their partnership, with TikTok serving as a promotional platform for Universal's artists and music. However, the disagreement over AI-generated music's role and its potential to reduce reliance on licensed content brings to light the strategic and financial implications for both parties. Legal experts and industry observers are closely watching the dispute, recognizing its potential to set precedents for how AI-generated content is managed and compensated across platforms.The public nature of this dispute is unusual in an industry where such negotiations often occur behind closed doors, indicating the high stakes involved. Artists signed with Universal, such as Noah Kahan and Yungblud, have voiced their perspectives, highlighting the personal and professional impacts of the standoff. The debate extends to songwriters and music publishers, who advocate for fair compensation and protections against the devaluation of human creativity by AI.This standoff between Universal and TikTok underscores the ongoing negotiation between leveraging new technologies for innovation and ensuring artists and creators are fairly compensated. As AI continues to evolve, its integration into creative industries will necessitate careful consideration of legal, ethical, and economic factors to balance innovation with the rights and livelihoods of human creators.AI Fight Complicates TikTok, Universal Music Licensing StandoffThe 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that California can continue enforcing its law that mandates background checks for ammunition purchases, temporarily suspending a previous decision by U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez that declared the law unconstitutional. This decision came from a divided panel, with a 2-1 vote in favor of maintaining the law while the state appeals Judge Benitez's ruling, which he argued violated the Second Amendment right to bear arms. Judges Richard Clifton and Holly Thomas, both Democratic appointees, supported the stay, whereas U.S. Circuit Judge Consuelo Callahan, a Republican appointee, dissented.California Attorney General Rob Bonta celebrated the decision, highlighting the importance of the state's ammunition laws in saving lives and ensuring they remain in effect during the ongoing legal defense. The law, which was challenged by individuals including Olympic gold medalist shooter Kim Rhode and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, requires gun owners to undergo background checks to buy ammunition and pay for a four-year ammunition permit. This measure, initially approved by California voters in 2016 and later amended by legislators to require background checks for each ammunition purchase starting in 2019, faces continued opposition from gun rights advocates.The legal battle reflects wider national debates on gun control, especially in the wake of the Supreme Court's June 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which recognized an individual's right to carry a handgun in public for self-defense and set a new standard for evaluating firearm laws. Judge Benitez's rejection of California's ammunition background check law cited a lack of historical precedent for such regulations, a point of contention that underscores the ongoing struggle between state efforts to regulate firearms and ammunition and the constitutional protections of the Second Amendment.California ammunition background check law can remain in effect, court rules | ReutersThe U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is poised to implement a new rule requiring proprietary traders and firms frequently dealing in U.S. government bonds to register as broker-dealers, introducing them to a regime of enhanced scrutiny. This initiative is part of a comprehensive strategy aimed at addressing structural deficiencies in the $26 trillion Treasury market, which have been identified as contributing to liquidity issues. By mandating registration for entities trading over $25 billion in Treasuries across a majority of the past six months, the rule intends to impose capital, liquidity, and other regulatory requirements on a sector that has become increasingly vital for market liquidity.Scheduled for a vote by the SEC's commissioners, the rule targets up to 46 proprietary trading firms, seeking to integrate them more closely into the regulatory framework governing Treasury market dealers. Critics, including prominent investors and industry groups, have expressed concerns that the rule's broad criteria may inadvertently ensnare corporations, insurers, and pension funds, potentially exacerbating liquidity challenges rather than alleviating them. Despite these criticisms and calls for moderation in the rule's application, the SEC has highlighted the value of industry feedback without committing to specific adjustments.The adoption of this rule marks a significant step in what is described as the most substantial renovation of the Treasury market in decades, with the potential to alter trading behaviors and the operational landscape for a wide range of market participants. The outcome of the final rule's wording remains closely watched, as it could dictate a pivotal shift in how entities engage with the Treasury market, balancing the push for transparency and stability against the risk of unintended consequences on market liquidity.In other words, in plain English, this new rule is a big deal because it's part of the biggest changes to the Treasury market we've seen in years. It could really change how people trade and work within this market. Everyone is keeping an eye on the exact language of the rule because it will play a key role in shaping the future of trading in government securities. The goal is to make trading more open and stable, but there's a bit of worry about whether this might make it harder to buy and sell quickly, which could shake things up for everyone involved.US SEC set to adopt Treasury market dealer rule as part of market overhaul | ReutersIn my column this week, I explore the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning in enhancing transfer pricing tax transparency. By way of very brief background, transfer pricing refers to the pricing of goods, services, and intellectual property when these are exchanged between divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliated companies within the same multinational enterprise. For example, if the Coca-Cola Company owns a subsidiary in Country A that develops the secret recipe for Coca-Cola and another subsidiary in Country B that manufactures the drink, the price set for transferring the recipe (an intangible asset) from Country A to Country B is subject to transfer pricing regulations. This practice is crucial for determining the income and expenses of each entity, thereby affecting the taxable income reported in different countries with different tax rates. Transfer pricing is closely regulated by tax authorities worldwide to prevent tax avoidance, ensuring that transactions between related parties are conducted at arm's length—that is, under conditions and prices that would apply if the entities were unrelated. The complexity of transfer pricing lies in its need for meticulous documentation and compliance with international guidelines, such as those set by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), to justify the prices set for these internal transactions. In other words, using the above Coca-Cola example, ideally acting as Coke I would want to shift income from a high-tax country to a lower-tax country. One way to do that would be to “charge” the subsidiary that manufactures the soda a very high cost for the recipe, assuming I want to move income out of the manufacturing country by way of expensing the cost of the recipe. There are myriad issues to be concerned about when related entities are setting prices for things like intangible assets which are very hard to place a real world market value on–there is always the risk of shenanigans. Transfer pricing, a critical yet contentious aspect of global taxation, is prone to manipulation as multinationals navigate the complexities of international tax law. I argue for the adoption of an open-source, public-facing AI model that can offer consistent and reliable valuations, providing a safe harbor for compliant taxpayers.AI's prowess lies in its ability to simulate market conditions and assign value to transfers between controlled entities, including intangible assets. This technology promises to bridge the gap where no market repository exists, offering a novel approach to assessing arm's-length transactions. The significance of precise valuation is underscored in transfer pricing, where the crux of compliance hinges on mutual understanding between taxpayers and regulators regarding valuation factors.By analyzing vast datasets and applying sophisticated algorithms, AI can deliver precise, consistent valuations with reduced administrative burdens. Such an approach not only fosters transparency but also mitigates the risk of non-compliance and associated penalties. As I emphasize, this is a critical juncture for regulators to incentivize adoption through the provision of benefits, alongside the traditional enforcement measures.The complexity of international transfer pricing regulations has escalated following initiatives like the OECD's base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) project. This backdrop makes the case for AI even stronger, as it aligns with efforts to combat tax avoidance and ensure that income correlates with the economic activities generating it. AI models, if properly developed and utilized, could revolutionize the practice by making compliance more manageable and equitable, particularly for developing countries.Looking ahead, the integration of AI into the tax domain appears inevitable. The challenge lies in who will dominate the development and application of these models. With strategic investment, AI tools could be made universally accessible, dramatically reducing compliance costs and promoting tax justice. This vision for the future leverages AI to encourage transparent compliance, potentially reshaping international trade and taxation for the better.Using AI Would Provide Greater Transfer Pricing Tax Transparency Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Prohibition Begins On this day in legal history, January 16 marks a significant moment in the United States with the enactment of the Eighteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1920. This amendment, ratified a year prior, initiated the era of Prohibition, a nationwide ban on the production, importation, transportation, and sale of alcoholic beverages. The move was largely driven by the temperance movement, which argued that alcohol was responsible for many societal problems, including poor health and moral decay.Prohibition represented a major shift in American legal and social policy, reflecting the growing influence of advocacy groups in shaping federal law. However, this era also witnessed the unintended consequences of such a sweeping legislative change. The ban led to the rise of bootlegging, illegal speakeasies, and a surge in organized crime as underworld figures like Al Capone capitalized on the lucrative illegal alcohol market.The enforcement of Prohibition posed significant challenges for the government, stretching the resources of law enforcement agencies and leading to widespread corruption. The federal government found it increasingly difficult to enforce the ban amidst public disregard for the law and the growth of an extensive black market.The legal and social experiment of Prohibition also sparked a national debate on individual rights, government intervention in private life, and the effectiveness of legislation in enforcing moral standards. This debate highlighted the complexities of legislating personal behavior and the limits of legal prohibitions.Despite its intentions to improve society, Prohibition had a paradoxical effect. It led to an increase in alcohol consumption in some areas, and the quality of available alcohol decreased, often with dangerous health implications due to unregulated production.The era of Prohibition also had a significant impact on the American legal system. It led to a substantial increase in court cases related to the enforcement of the Eighteenth Amendment, burdening the judiciary and reshaping legal practices and policies.Ultimately, the widespread opposition to Prohibition and the issues arising from its enforcement led to its repeal in 1933 with the ratification of the Twenty-first Amendment. This made Prohibition one of the most notable examples of a constitutional amendment being entirely overturned, reflecting a profound shift in public opinion and policy.Today, the legacy of Prohibition continues to influence American legal and cultural landscapes. It serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in regulating personal behavior through law and the dynamic nature of societal values and legal norms. The Eighteenth Amendment's enactment on January 16, 1920, thus stands as a significant historical milestone in the ongoing dialogue between law, society, and individual freedoms in the United States.Parabellum Capital, which emerged from Credit Suisse 12 years ago, has recently closed a $754 million litigation fund, one of the largest in the private sector for litigation finance. This third and largest fund by Parabellum has two-thirds of its capital already committed to 50 commercial lawsuit investments, though specific details about the investors and the lawsuits remain undisclosed.This development underscores the growth and maturation of the litigation finance industry, which is increasingly seen as a lucrative investment avenue, separate from traditional equity markets. In the U.S., the industry managed $13.5 billion in 2022, marking a 9% increase from the previous year. This trend is driven by large players like Parabellum, overshadowing smaller firms in the space.Parabellum's inception goes back to 2006 at Credit Suisse, where it started as the first institutional commercial litigation finance business. Since its spinoff, Parabellum has expanded significantly, now managing $1.45 billion in assets with 18 employees. Their previous $465 million fund, raised in 2020, is now in the final stages, focusing on case management rather than new investments.The first fund of Parabellum, which closed at $166 million, led to substantial secondary market transactions, showcasing the firm's success and the growing interest in litigation finance. Additionally, Parabellum's latest fund includes insurance protection for a portion of the investment, illustrating the synergy between insurance markets and litigation finance. This protective measure also facilitates leveraging opportunities, attracting more investors to this burgeoning field.Parabellum's New $754 Million Litigation Fund Is Among LargestOn January 16, Donald Trump is set to defend himself in a Manhattan court against defamation charges brought by writer E. Jean Carroll, who accuses him of rape. Carroll, seeking at least $10 million in damages, alleges Trump defamed her in 2019 by denying he attacked her in a New York department store dressing room. Jury selection for this civil trial is beginning, with Trump planning to testify, requiring him to return from campaigning in Iowa.This court appearance is one of several legal challenges Trump faces. He's pleaded not guilty in four criminal cases, including two related to the 2020 election, and is involved in at least two other civil cases. Trump, leading in the Republican presidential nomination race, has integrated his legal troubles into his campaign narrative, criticizing the judicial system.In a previous trial, a jury awarded Carroll $5 million for Trump's sexual abuse and defamation in 2022, a decision Trump is appealing. In the current trial, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan has limited Trump's defense options, including barring him from denying the sexual assault or Carroll's account. The judge has also prohibited discussions of DNA evidence, Carroll's sexual history, or suggestions of Democratic funding for her case.The trial's outcome will determine additional damages owed to Carroll. Kaplan's rulings, including the recognition of Carroll's rape claim as "substantially true," may pose challenges for Trump's defense. The 2005 "Access Hollywood" tape, which Trump did not retract in a 2022 deposition, will also be presented as evidence, potentially offering insight into Trump's attitude toward Carroll.Donald Trump due in court for second E. Jean Carroll trial | ReutersJoseph Tacopina, a member of Donald Trump's legal team, has announced his withdrawal from representing the former U.S. President in two significant legal cases. Tacopina confirmed he would no longer be involved in a criminal case in Manhattan, where Trump faces charges of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment to a porn star before the 2016 presidential election. Trump has pleaded not guilty to these charges.Additionally, Tacopina will step down from Trump's appeal in a civil case brought by writer E. Jean Carroll, who accused Trump of rape. In this case, a jury previously awarded Carroll $5 million after finding Trump liable for sexual assault and defamation, claims which Trump also denies.This change in Trump's legal representation occurs as the 2024 presidential campaign heats up, with Trump being an early favorite in the Republican primary. Tacopina, known for representing high-profile clients and appearing as a cable news commentator, is one of several attorneys who have recently ceased representing Trump in ongoing legal matters. This includes members of his Florida legal team who stepped down following Trump's indictment on charges related to national security documents.Trump lawyer Tacopina withdraws from Manhattan legal team | ReutersA recent ruling by U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle in Florida declared that the U.S. law prohibiting firearms in post offices is unconstitutional. This decision, part of a case involving postal worker Emmanuel Ayala, aligns with the 2022 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which expanded gun rights. Judge Mizelle, appointed by former President Donald Trump, found that the charge against Ayala for possessing a gun in a federal facility violated his Second Amendment rights. Ayala, a postal service truck driver, had a concealed weapons permit and carried a Smith & Wesson 9mm handgun for self-defense. He was indicted after bringing the gun onto Postal Service property in 2012 and fleeing federal agents. While the charge for forcibly resisting arrest remains, the firearm possession charge was dismissed due to the ruling.Judge Mizelle's decision reflects the Supreme Court's establishment of a new test for firearms laws, requiring consistency with historical traditions of firearm regulation. She noted that while post offices have been around since the nation's founding, the federal prohibition of guns in government buildings only began in 1964 and extended to post offices in 1972. Mizelle argued that no historical practice dating back to the 1700s justified this ban, and that such restrictions could lead to the practical non-existence of the right to bear arms.Ban on guns in post offices is unconstitutional, US judge rules | ReutersIn my column, I discuss the need for tax expenditure transparency, highlighted by Intuit Inc.'s request for $94 million in research and development tax credits in 2022. This request coincided with the IRS receiving funds to develop a public tax preparation option, Direct File, creating a paradox where tax expenditures and revenue spending support both Direct File and Intuit, which opposes it. This was revealed in a Form 10-K financial summary report by Intuit, leading to Senator Elizabeth Warren's unfulfilled request for detailed accounting of these expenses.I argue that such tax expenditure information often surfaces only incidentally, preventing taxpayers from understanding where their money is allocated. Despite the US ranking sixth in the Global Tax Expenditures Transparency Index, the lack of clarity in expenditure data indicates a worldwide issue of transparency in tax spending.The column also highlights Intuit's extensive lobbying efforts, spending millions annually to oppose the public free-file option. It points out the irony of public funds being used to develop free tax services while simultaneously subsidizing private companies like Intuit, who seek to hinder these public initiatives.I compare the situation to running heating and air conditioning simultaneously, with public and private interests in direct competition. This raises questions about the fairness of allocating tax credits to private entities like Intuit, which could undermine underfunded public services.The column suggests that increased transparency in tax expenditures is akin to patent law, where disclosure benefits society. Entities seeking R&D tax credits should disclose the nature and impact of their research, aligning public funding with public interest. Although companies might resist this on privacy grounds, the overall benefit would be greater market sector intelligence and accountability.Finally, I underscore that Intuit's actions against the backdrop of government and public unawareness illustrate the need for reform in tax expenditure allocation. Increased transparency would serve taxpayers and the economy, ensuring funds are used effectively for societal benefit.Intuit $94M R&D Funding Request Shows Need for Tax Transparency Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Koons v. Platkin is a challenge to certain provisions of New Jersey Bill A4769/S3214 – now known as Chapter 131 – that overhauled the state's firearms and concealed carry laws following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Among other things, the law features 25 broad categories of “sensitive places” where permit holders may not carry a firearm. Additionally, the law makes all private property presumptively a “sensitive place” and requires permit holders to obtain consent from the property owner before carrying on their property. Chapter 131 faced legal challenge immediately upon being signed into law by the Governor of New Jersey. At the District Court level, plaintiffs argued that several of the “sensitive place” restrictions plainly violated the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Plaintiffs also challenged a provision that required permit holders to render their weapons inoperable while inside a moving vehicle. The State of New Jersey has maintained that Chapter 131 is consistent with the Second Amendment and the decision in Bruen. The District Court granted a TRO and later a preliminary injunction noting that certain parts of the law were “plainly unconstitutional.” The case is now being litigated in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit where oral arguments were heard on October 25, 2023. Peter A. Patterson, Partner at Cooper & Kirk and counsel to plaintiffs, discussed the case.

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)

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)

Riding Shotgun With Charlie #174 Tom King New York State Rifle & Pistol Association National Rifle Association BOD Member   Last summer, I thought it would be good to have Tom King on the show before the NYSRPA v Bruen decision. I messaged him and he said yes to being on the show, but I didn't follow up. This past April at the NRA Annual Meetings, Anthony Colandro (RSWC #003 & #025) introduced us and said I should have Tom on the show. With the summer here and the anniversary of the NYSRPA v Bruen decision, I figured it was a good time to film a show!    Tom grew up in an anti-gun household. His father was a pilot in World War 2 and didn't want to have anything to do with guns when he got back. However, Tom learned to shoot, earning a merit badge in Boy Scouts.    Eventually, a friend asked Tom if he wanted to be the Legislative Director of NYSRPA because Tom and his wife owned a company that delivered memos to politicians. Reluctantly, he agreed to the job. After one year in this position, the then-president approached Tom and said he was stepping down. Then asked Tom to take his place due to his political knowledge. He took the president's role thinking it would be for 2 years. That was 18 years ago. During his tenure, he's noticed first hand that the government is doing things in little subtle ways to take our rights by what I call the “salami method”, which is one thin slice at a time. He says that other than the S.A.F.E. Act, we didn't lose our rights at once. Often, people will understand why the antis want something, then admit that it's not a big deal, then give it away. Until there's nothing left to give.    Tom got involved with the NRA at a Friends of the NRA in Poughkeepsie. A mutual friend took him up to meet someone. That person suggested that Tom should be on a committee at NRA. Tom didn't know who it was but after formal introductions, it was John Sigler. Mr Sigler was only the First Vice President of NRA, on his way to be President, but Tom didn't know who he was. A few months later, he was nominated to be on the Clubs and Association committee. Tom also shares a story about introducing Wayne LaPierre, saying the NYSRPA is the parent organization of the NRA.    We finally got into NYSRPA v Bruen. After the decision was for NYSRPA, I was insistent on calling it the NYSRPA case, but friends said we needed to use Bruen. Tom shares with us that Bruen was a pro Second Amendment supporter, but his job was more political than police work, and he was just doing what he was told by disgraced New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. That led to the then unelected, anti-gun Kathy Hochul to roll out and support the “Concealed Carry Improvement Act”.    We spend a lot of time talking about how NYSRPA v Bruen started, how long it lasted, and why it's important to support your state groups. That can be by joining your state group and by doing more than just writing a check to pay dues. By the way, you can also join other state groups, too. There's not a limit on which organizations you can support. Tom said the NRA picked up about 70% of the tab, but NYSRPA picked up the rest. It total came to $2,200,000 in legal fees. We also talk about how politicians “make friends” with everyone, even if they don't support our rights as Americans.    For my show, travel, editing, and everything involved, it's a challenge to do a current and topical episode. But what I can do is evergreen material that lines up with anniversaries of big events. The NYSRPA v Bruen was a very big decision. We're finding it out in over 260 other cases in the first 6 months after it happened.  Time will let us see some of the other impacts it is having on our Second Amendment right!   Favorite quotes: “Then all of a sudden, you look at it and you have no rights at all or are on the verge of having  no rights”. “I wanted to protect those rights that we had, that I grew up with, for my son and my daughter and their kids.” “The Supreme Court looked at it the way the Founding Fathers looked at it.” “If it wasn't for the NRA, the Bruen decision, the Rifle & Pistol decision, would never come about”. “I have never been asked to sit in on one his pre-bill meetings. Never once.” “Vote for your rights. Vote for what's important to you.” New York State Rifle & Pistol Association https://www.nysrpa.org/   NYSRPA Facebook https://www.facebook.com/Kinger1964   National Rifle Association https://home.nra.org/ 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    

Update 4/21 1:42PM: Jury found Tesla Autopilot did not fail in the crash. A California state court jury is deliberating in what appears to be the first trial related to a crash involving Tesla's Autopilot partially automated driving software. Justine Hsu, a resident of Los Angeles, sued Tesla in 2020, alleging defects in the design of Autopilot and the airbag and seeking more than $3 million in damages for the alleged defects and other claims. Tesla denies liability for the 2019 accident, stating that Hsu used Autopilot on city streets, despite the company's user manual warning against doing so. The trial, which has unfolded in Los Angeles Superior Court over the last three weeks, has featured testimony from three Tesla engineers. The verdict could offer an important sign of the risk facing Tesla as it tests and rolls out its Autopilot and more advanced "Full Self-Driving" system. While the trial's outcome will not be legally binding in other cases, it is considered a test case because it would serve as a bellwether to help Tesla and other plaintiffs' lawyers hone their strategies. Tesla is also under investigation by the U.S. Justice Department and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration over its claims about self-driving capabilities and the safety of the technology, respectively.US jury set to decide test case in Tesla Autopilot crash | ReutersThe Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is considering updating its Green Guides, a set of guidelines established in 1992 to help businesses avoid making deceptive environmental marketing claims, with an overhaul having the potential to significantly impact the marketing strategies of companies. The Green Guides are intended to be instructive rather than punitive, however, their influence has spread over the past three decades, with Maine, Minnesota, New York, and Rhode Island using them to define their own laws against fraudulent consumer marketing. The FTC has the authority to take action against companies making deceptive environmental claims and can also issue guidance on whether there should be new mandatory rules, rather than just advisory guidelines. Environmental groups, industries and individuals have all submitted comments since the FTC started the process of updating the guides in December last year. The FTC is hosting a public workshop in May on the subject of what can be called recyclable. The revisions to the Green Guides are expected to give environmental activists and consumers fresh ammunition to bring challenges and lawsuits.FTC Eyes Revisions to the Guidelines that Shape Green MarketingFox Corp. and Rupert Murdoch, along with his son Lachlan and former US House Speaker Paul Ryan, are facing a new lawsuit in Delaware's Chancery Court. This comes just two days after Fox announced it would pay $787.5 million to end a defamation case over lies it broadcast about the 2020 election. The circumstances suggest that the suit blames the company's leaders for steering it into a legal disaster. The proposed class action is the first court case seeking to hold Fox accountable since the Dominion settlement was announced, but it appears to echo a shareholder derivative suit filed April 11, just as the defamation trial was getting underway. The earlier complaint focused at length on blockbuster revelations that emerged from the Fox-Dominion case in February. Fox still faces a parallel defamation case brought by Smartmatic USA Corp. Both Dominion and Smartmatic have also sued Newsmax Media Inc. The ongoing cases seek billions in damages, and Dominion recently said it has been “under siege” from threats since the networks devoted airtime to slandering it.Fox, Murdochs Face New Lawsuit After $788 Million Dominion DealA federal court in the District of Columbia has ruled that the district's large-capacity magazine ban is constitutional, following a preliminary constitutional challenge by gun owners. The ruling by Judge Rudolph Contreras of the US District Court for the District of Columbia found that large-capacity magazines present “unprecedented societal concerns” and are subject to “dramatic technological changes” that warrant a public safety response. Although the plaintiffs argued that large-capacity magazines are “arms” within the meaning of the Second Amendment, the court found that they are not protected by the constitutional provision because they are not used for self-defense purposes. Gun owners had sought a preliminary injunction against the law, but the court's order denied the request, opening up the possibility of a review by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. The case is the latest in a series of legal challenges to state gun laws that have followed the US Supreme Court's recent decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which held that the Second Amendment protects the right to carry guns outside the home.DC's Large-Capacity Magazine Ban Constitutional, Court Says (1)Altria Group, a tobacco giant, is set to face trial on Monday in a lawsuit filed by the San Francisco Unified School District. The lawsuit accuses the company of contributing to a teen vaping epidemic, along with e-cigarette maker Juul Labs Inc. The school district is seeking to force Altria to pay for the cost of tackling the problem, stating that teachers and staff "have had to go to extreme lengths to respond to the ever-growing number of students using e-cigarettes on school grounds." Altria, which held a 35% stake in Juul from 2018 until earlier this year, faces thousands of similar cases from individuals, local government entities, and states. The San Francisco school district's case was chosen by the presiding judge as a bellwether or test case. Juul has since settled the school district's lawsuit and most of the similar claims against it, paying more than $1 billion to 48 states and territories and $1.7 billion to individuals and local government entities.Altria faces first trial over claims it helped market Juul to teens | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This week, we look back at several of the big decisions that came down from the U.S. Supreme Court in its most recent term, including New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, West Virginia v. EPA, and Vega v. Tekoh. We also look ahead to a couple of the major cases coming down the pike next term and discuss the alarming trends that are arising with this packed Court's conservative supermajority. Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.org Today's Host: Jeanne Hruska, ACS Sr Advisor for Communications and Strategy Host: Evan Monod, ACS Law Fellow Guest: Christopher Wright Durocher, ACS Vice President for Policy and Program Guest: Lindsay Langholz, ACS Director of Policy and Program Link: 2021-2022 ACS National Supreme Court Review Program Visit the Podcast Website: Broken Law Podcast Email the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.org Follow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | LinkedIn | YouTube ----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of American Constitution Society 2022.

On this show, we discuss the recent Supreme Court decision New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, the Second Amendment, and gun control.

Welcome to Fireside Breakdowns season 3! We're wasting no time this season - we're jumping straight into the deep end with a series about how the Supreme Court decisions that were handed down this Summer could potentially affect life for ALL Americans. We feel like we saw the beginnings of a well-lined path being laid out for the U.S. - some might even say a train track - and we're concerned about where it will lead us if we don't pay attention. That's why we're going to start by taking a closer look at some of the decisions released by the Supreme Court in May and June 2022. Many of these cases were widely publicized. Some were published without much fanfare. But each of them could have significant impacts on the way we live our lives from this point on. Bonus discussion of Shinn v Ramirez + Episode 2 of the series - 1 Step Forward, 2 Steps Back - are available NOW on Patreon. Cases discussed: Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, West Virginia v EPA, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc v. Bruen, Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta, and Vega v. Tekoh. What's in this episode? Discussion of each of the above cases, and their potential impact on the future We get very salty about Brett Kavanaugh Good News: DHHS guidelines on emergency abortions If you'd like to get in touch… You can leave us a review at: https://ratethispodcast.com/fireside Or you can drop us a note from our Contact page! You can find all of our sources in our Show Notes. And, check out our Patreon Page! Patrons get access to early episode drops, bonus content, priority topic requests, quarterly happy hours, and more!

In this episode I discuss two Supreme Court cases. NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW YORK STATE POLICE, ET AL and Dobbs v. Jackson. I also discuss a federal grant to export atheism, humanism, and non-religious adherents worldwide, hence the pagans are Postmill. I hope you enjoy it friends! Sources: Dobbs v. Jackson Case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen Epoch Times article on federal grant exporting atheism -> The letter written by GOP'ers challenging the grant -> The grant website ITSELF Article reporting on young women being encouraged to abort babies Fountain.fm -> https://fountain.fm/show/U78tm316mhRmq1LFZ6HS Website: forthekingpodcast.com Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/For-The-King-105492691873696/ Gab page: https://gab.com/ForTheKingPod Contact: forthekingpodcast@gmail.com Donate Crypto: https://commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/f63fd7db-919e-44f6-9c58-8ec2891f3eb5 Kingly Clothing: https://www.bonfire.com/store/for-the-king/ --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/rocky-ramsey/support

Beth Alcazar joins David Webb to discuss the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen to uphold Americans' constitutional right to self-defense.

In This Episode It's another ACP Round Table! Join Weer'd, Erin, Oddball, and David as they talk about: The passage of the Bipartisan Gun Bill, and how it probably isn't as bad as you've heard. A Pride Day attack in Oslo, Norway, and how spree killings do happen in other countries. There are also some more grim facts regarding the police response in the Uvalde School massacre. But the point of this show is to celebrate the victory of NYSRPA vs. Bruen! 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 Biden Signs New Federal Gun Restrictions Into Law S.2938 - Bipartisan Safer Communities Act "Gun Rights Cake" Analogy Pride Day Shooting in Norway Constitutional Carry in Louisiana (PDF) Uvalde Timeline Uvalde police continue to harass Angeli Gomez Uvalde Classroom Door Wasn't Locked In 6-3 ruling, court strikes down New York's concealed-carry law NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL. v. BRUEN (PDF) Maura Healy Response AG Healey Statement on SCOTUS Decision to Strike Down New York's Concealed-Carry Gun Licensing Law Governor Hochcul Response Keith Olbermann Response Toobin: SCOTUS wants 2nd  Amendment to be a "first class right" without any restrictions Murphy says that the state has few gun-free zones because it had a may-issue law, and thanks to Bruen, that "is no longer tenable." California working on denying gun permits based on "ideological viewpoints" Matt Larosiere: FuddBusters NYSRPA vs Bruen Decision (Video) NYC proposes 'sensitive areas' after SCOTUS guns ruling Mayor Adams and City Council poised to use ‘sensitive places' designation to limit firearms in NYC White house response to NYSRPA case Pink Pistols History Activist Equates Being Pro-2a With Being Pro-Slavery As more people get guns and carry permits, Philly sees a sharp rise in homicides ruled justified Remington Ammunition Introduces 10MM Golden Saber Rounds Hessney Auction Company  

It's our Supreme Court special as we talk about several of the cases decided in their most recent session. (0:27) Decision in West Virginia v. EPA which found the EPA could not regulate outside of the authorities congress explicitly delegated to them (1:19) Decision in Biden v. Texas which upheld the administrations authority to rescind Trump's Remain in Mexico policy (6:50) Decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School district which upheld Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression (8:02) More on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and addressing some of the pro-abortion advocates' responses and attacks. (10:27) More on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Buren, how it could overturn previous court rulings on laws and policies infringing on our 2nd Amendment rights, and the lawyers who won the case being asked to leave their law firm. (31:28) The White House is so out of touch. (36:48) The death toll from our open border policy is increasing. (38:33) Cassidy denounces her fellow Cassidy (Hutchinson) who delivered a completely unreliable testimony in the January 6th hearings. (42:19) USC and UCLA will be joining the Big 10 in 2024 (48:17) #SCOTUS #EPA #Dobbs #RoeVWade #RightToLife #2ndAmendment #January6th #January6thHearings #Big10

The Supreme Court has been doling out enough conservative decisions this year to flood D.C. in a sea of liberal tears.  As the liberal representative of the group, Calvin leads the discussion and cross examines Brooke, Cal, and Josh's conservative critiques.  The gang focuses on four cases in particular: Carson v. Makin (Maine can't exclude religious schools from a state tuition program), Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (a football coach at a public high school had a constitutional right to pray at the 50-yard line after the games), New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (states with strict limits on carrying guns in public violate the Second Amendment), and, of course, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, (Overturning the constitutional right to an abortion established by Roe v. Wade).

This week we talk about the landmark Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, a ruling that Michael never expected to see in his lifetime. MichaelBane.TV - On the Radio episode # 126. 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 Supreme Court Decision itself “Key Points from Justice Thomas' Brilliant Decision on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms”/Clay and Buck Show “And a Wail Went Up…”/Jim Shepherd Thoughts on the Decision “How Alito's concurrence smashes gun control”/Tom Knighton “SCOTUS holds on to gun, magazine ban cases pending in conference”/Cam Edwards The Sullivan Act in NYC The Music of Nbdy Nprtnt The Music of Wesly Thomas

In our longest episode yet, we break down two massively consequential cases: Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. 

What to make of the Court's recent ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen?

With the recent US Supreme Court decisions on abortion and gun rights, the political opportunists and agendized media are doing everything they can to play on the emotions of the people. Both disingenuous (or constitutionally illiterate) politicians and so-called “journalists” are employing deceitful headlines and false narratives to serve a far-Left ideology and agenda.In both the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (Bruen) and Dobbs, State Health Officer Of The Mississippi Department of Health v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (Dobbs), the narratives being used by the political and activist classes and the mainstream media complex to mislead the public on the meanings of the rulings is nothing less than intellectually criminal and in the least exploitative...RELATED ARTICLE(S)/Link(s):https://www.undergroundusa.com/p/the-left-is-using-the-issues-of-gunsSign-up for our mostly daily mail out here:https://www.undergroundusa.comSupport Underground USA (BTC)https://commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/7b2d8c35-55b9-49ed-9918-f7cc6f2a488dSupport Underground USA (USD)https://checkout.square.site/merchant/SW8KGEWAS2A22/checkout/SXG24XFCOWMROX3D5IN42TB2

In today's podcast, Joel and Chris review the big week at the Supreme Court. Additionally, Joel interviews Danny Karon, Your Lovable Lawyer, about lawyer wellness.  First, Joel and Chris review the Second Amendment and the 6-3 ruling that protected the right to bear arms in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Next in Carson v. Makin, the Court rules that public funding can be used at religious schools. Joel and Chris review the implications.  Next, Joel talks with Danny Karon about his legal career journey and how lawyers can be problem-solvers that genuinely serve people. Danny explains the concept of legal wellness and his mission to make justice and legal insight more accessible. He reviews how his work with Your Lovable Lawyer can educate people on both personal legal needs and some of the prominent legal issues of the last couple years like vaccine law and Depp v. Heard.  Lastly, in Courtroom Quarterback (beginning at 1:23:00), Joel and Chris talk recent sports news including Roger Goodell's recent drama with Barstool founder.  To find Danny Karon, see here:  YourLovableLawyer.com Facebook Youtube

The SCOTUS decision in the Dobbs v. Jackson case has officially been delivered. (0:28) A prominent figure of the World Economic Forum asks the question of what we are to do with “useless people.” (11:57) Supreme Court shoots down restrictive concealed carry laws in their decision on the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen case. This didn't stop the Senate from advancing a new gun control bill through. (20:36) Additional information and photos surrounding the school shooting in Uvalde, TX show the police response was even worse than originally suspected. (31:02) The International Swimming Federation will not allow post-pubescent biological males to compete with women. (41:07) The World Council of Health released a detailed report and called for the global removal of COVID-19 Vaccines. (43:28) The oil and gas industry offered a 10-point plan to help with supply issues. Biden mocked it and instead proposes to pause the gas tax for 3 months. (46:45) Ending on a lighter note of a very unintelligent criminal and a primate in the drug cartel. (53:32) #SCOTUS #RoeVWade #RightToLife #TheGreatReset #gunrights #guncontrol #2ndAmendment #Uvalde #LGBT #LGBTQ #COVID #inflation 

Michael Letts is the founder, president - CEO of In-Vest USA, a national grassroots non-profit organization that is helping hundreds of communities provide thousands of bulletproof vests for their police forces through educational, public relations, sponsorship and fundraising programs.--A 6-3 decision came down today from the Supreme Court in the case of New York State Rifle - Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. The court said that the state's law for carrying firearms violates the 14th amendment.--So what impact will this ruling have beyond New York- Michael believes this shows citizens are beginning to become fortified and realizing that they have the ability to determine America's future and that we will, by God's grace, prevail in that effort. --Michael also commented on the -red flag- aspect of gun legislation coming up for a vote in Congress, the latest on the shooting at Uvalde, George Soros, the defund-the-police movement and more. Caller questions and input rounded out the broadcast.

The Supreme Court just issued a 6-3 opinion in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association. v. Bruen. At issue is New York's "proper cause requirement" which forces applicants to prove "a special need for self protection distinguishable from that of the general community" in order "to obtain an unrestricted license to 'have and carry' a concealed 'pistol or revolver'." The opinion ruled that the requirement "violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense." Jay, Jordan, and the rest of the Sekulow team discuss and give their expert constitutional analysis of this significant Supreme Court opinion.

Michael Letts is the founder, president - CEO of In-Vest USA, a national grassroots non-profit organization that is helping hundreds of communities provide thousands of bulletproof vests for their police forces through educational, public relations, sponsorship and fundraising programs.--A 6-3 decision came down today from the Supreme Court in the case of New York State Rifle - Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. The court said that the state's law for carrying firearms violates the 14th amendment.--So what impact will this ruling have beyond New York- Michael believes this shows citizens are beginning to become fortified and realizing that they have the ability to determine America's future and that we will, by God's grace, prevail in that effort. --Michael also commented on the -red flag- aspect of gun legislation coming up for a vote in Congress, the latest on the shooting at Uvalde, George Soros, the defund-the-police movement and more. Caller questions and input rounded out the broadcast.

Sam and Emma host Matt Ford, staff writer for the New Republic, to discuss the most important cases coming before the Supreme Court this month. Then Sam and Emma are joined by Akela Lacy, politics reporter at the Intercept, to discuss her recent piece "What's Stopping Chesa Boudin?" ahead of his recall election. Emma and Sam first cover the indictment of 5 Proud Boys on the eve of the nationally televised 1/6 hearings, and John Cornyn finally comes to his senses on gun control and speaks out against easy access to… Elementary Schools. Matt Ford then joins as they walk through the massive consequences that we must prepare for regarding this conservative SCOTUS and their upcoming decisions. Matt begins by assessing the discord behind the scenes of the Court right now, from a difficulty in finding cohesion in rulings and reports of lacking amicability, to the news of the leak and the friction that has caused, before diving deeper into internal reactions to the leak, including the belief that it was a liberal-left attack on the institution's integrity, and what role the justices could've played in the matter. Next, they cover the matter of what the leak covered, diving into Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization and the 15-week cut off as an effective reversal of Roe v. Wade, as well as looking at the greater implications of undermining 4A privacy rights, from an overturn of Obergerfell to a return to sodomy laws. Matt, Sam, and Emma also cover the upcoming New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen as the first 2A case since 2010, and look to West Virginia v. EPA as the next step in the conservative road to demolishing the administrative state. Then, Akela Lacy joins as she situates the recall attempt against Chesa Boudin as one of many recalls targeting reform-minded DAs, regardless of popularity or success, and a product of an effort that started before Boudin even effectively took office, with massive amounts of money flowing in from countless angles, including the former Chair of the San Francisco DNC  working as a paid “volunteer,” and mass investment from police unions and realty associations. Next, they cover the massive project that this recall effort has entailed, including the purchasing of the website days before Boudin took office and the creation of an “outlet” (it's just a substack) on the talking points, before unpacking the lies and misinformation that fuels the establishment attacks, and wrapping up with a discussion on the relationship between Boudin and the San Francisco police. And in the Fun Half: Sam and Emma watch Arnulfo Reyes' heartbreaking recount of his class' experience in the shooting at Robb Elementary, Sam from St. Paul dives into Minnesota infrastructure and redlining, John from San Antonio runs through upcoming CA primaries, and Grant Stinchfield and Stephen Crowder do their best ahistorical spin on the Holocaust. Charles from TN discusses owning a Tesla and having people try to talk to him about Musk, Kowalski from Nebraska celebrates international Antifa victory day (D-Day) and unpacks the Ukrainian wheat harvest, Kyle Rittenhouse spreads misinformation about himself, presumably, so someone will actually hold him to account, and Justin from Cincinnati discusses transphobia and Ohio, plus, your calls and IMs! Check out Matt's work here: https://newrepublic.com/authors/matt-ford Check out Akela's piece here: https://theintercept.com/2022/06/03/san-francisco-chesa-boudin-recall/ Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here:  https://madmimi.com/signups/170390/join Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Check out today's sponsors: Cozy Earth: One out of three Americans report being sleep deprived, and their sheets could be the problem. Luckily Cozy Earth provides the SOFTEST, MOST LUXURIOUS and BEST-TEMPERATURE REGULATING sheets. Cozy Earth has been featured on Oprah's Most Favorite Things List Four Years in a Row! Made from super soft viscose from bamboo, Cozy Earth Sheets breathe so you sleep at the perfect temperature all year round.  And for a limited time, SAVE 35% on Cozy Earth Bedding. Go to https://cozyearth.com/and enter my special promo code MAJORITY at checkout to SAVE 35% now. ZipRecruiter: Some things in life we like to pick out for ourselves - so we know we've got the one that's best for us - like cuts of steak or mattresses. What if you could do the same for hiring - choose your ideal candidate before they even apply? That's where ZipRecruiter's ‘Invite to Apply' comes in - it gives YOU, as the hiring manager, the power to pick your favorites from top candidates. According to ZipRecruiter Internal Data, jobs where employers use ZipRecruiter's ‘Invite to Apply' get on average two and a half times more candidates — which helps make for a faster hiring process. See for yourself! Just go to this exclusive web address, https://www.ziprecruiter.com/majority to try ZipRecruiter for free! ExpressVPN: We all take risks every day when we go online, whether we think about it or not. And using the internet without ExpressVPN? That's like driving without car insurance! ExpressVPN acts as online insurance. It creates a secure, encrypted tunnel between your device and the internet so hackers can't steal your personal data. It'd take a hacker with a supercomputer over a billion years to get past ExpressVPN's encryption. And ExpressVPN is simple to use on all your devices! Just fire up the app and click one button to get protected. Secure your online data TODAY by visiting https://www.expressvpn.com/majority That's https://www.expressvpn.com/majority and you can get an extra three months FREE. Support the St. Vincent Nurses today! https://action.massnurses.org/we-stand-with-st-vincents-nurses/ Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Subscribe to Matt's other show Literary Hangover on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/literaryhangover Check out The Nomiki Show on YouTube. https://www.patreon.com/thenomikishow 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 The Letterhack's upcoming Kickstarter project for his new graphic novel! https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/milagrocomic/milagro-heroe-de-las-calles Subscribe to Discourse Blog, a newsletter and website for progressive essays and related fun partly run by AM Quickie writer Jack Crosbie. https://discourseblog.com/ Subscribe to AM Quickie writer Corey Pein's podcast News from Nowhere. https://www.patreon.com/newsfromnowhere  Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattBinder @MattLech @BF1nn @BradKAlsop The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

In this hour: - Attorney Don Kilmer discusses the upcoming SCOTUS decision in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen case, and a case out of Hawaii - Suppressors, subsonic rimfire, and ground squirrels - Range Report on the Sig P365 Spectre Comp pistol Tom Gresham's Gun Talk 05.22.22 Hour 1

Late last year, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case challenging a NY State firearm regulation under the Second Amendment—New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. This is the case that gun rights advocates have been waiting for and they are counting on the Supreme Court to deliver a blockbuster decision that radically expands the individual right to bear arms. Gun violence prevention advocates are bracing for the worst while hoping that the Court will be more circumspect in its decision. Christopher Wright Durocher speaks with Darrell Miller and Po Murray about how we got here and what the future may hold when the Supreme Court issues its decision later this year. ----------------- Join the Progressive Legal Movement Today: ACSLaw.org Today's Host: Christopher Wright Durocher, ACS Senior Director for Policy and Program Guest: Darrell Miller Melvin G. Shimm Professor of Law at Duke Law Guest: Po Murray, Chairperson of the Newtown Action Alliance Link: Supreme Court oral argument in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen Link: "Conservatives sound like anti-racists — when the cause is gun rights" by Darrell Miller Link: "Constitutional Conflict and Sensitive Places" by Darrell Miller Link: Gun Violence Prevention Groups Statement on the Need to Expand and Rebalance the Supreme Court Link: "Firearm Localism" by Joseph Blocher Visit the Podcast Website: Broken Law Podcast Email the Show: Podcast@ACSLaw.org Follow ACS on Social Media: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | LinkedIn | YouTube ----------------- Production House: Flint Stone Media Copyright of American Constitution Society 2022.

Dan Hollaway and Sons of Liberty Gunworks owner breakdown the Kyle Rittenhouse trial and what the Supreme Court's ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen could mean for future Second Amendment AND First Amendment rights.     Go to Amazon.com/DRINKINBROS to try Amazon Music Unlimited FREE for THREE months!

Gun rights are in the news again as the Supreme Court hears New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.  Professor Amar discusses his landmark work on the Bill of Rights, and invites you to join him in an analysis of the issues in this and other “rights” cases.  These cases require an appropriate methodology, and we are treated to a master class in the tools we need to perform this analysis.  As we jump into the case, we will be armed with the framework we need for 2nd amendment cases, 14th amendment cases, and indeed most of the landmark cases that have come before the court over the past half-century, and will be before us, and the Court, now and in the near future.

In this week's Debriefing the Law, Joel and Chris unpack recent and upcoming Supreme Court news. One of those cases is New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, involving a handgun licensing law in New York. The gun law requires an applicant for a concealed carry to show “proper cause” for a license. The Court will argue whether this violates the Second Amendment. Next, Joel and Chris discuss the abortion case before the Court regarding private citizens enforcing it. They also discuss the tragedy on the movie set in which Alec Baldwin accidentally shot and killed the director of photography of movie Rust. They discuss the culpability and whether there could be criminal charges.  In Courtroom Quarterback (beginning 22:10), they talk the legality and practice of NFL players giving away footballs during the game. Next, they talk about player crimes of falsely claiming injuries and getting reimbursed. They also discuss Roger Goodell and the NFL investigation into the work environment and culture of the NFL and the Washington Football Team, specifically in the treatment of women. Of course, no real change or findings come out of the investigation from the non-profit that is the NFL. Lastly, they cover teams moving cities and the defrauding involved.

Professor Adam Winkler from the UCLA School of Law joins us for a high caliber discussion about New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett and what that case could mean for 2nd Amendment rights. Special thanks to our sponsor Nota.

Professor Adam Winkler from the UCLA School of Law joins us for a high caliber discussion about New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett and what that case could mean for 2nd Amendment rights. Special thanks to our sponsor Nota.

Professor Adam Winkler from the UCLA School of Law joins us for a high caliber discussion about New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Corlett and what that case could mean for 2nd Amendment rights. Special thanks to our sponsor Nota.

The Supreme Court recently decided it would hear New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Keith Corlett, a case involving state limitations on an individual's right to carry a firearm. Second Amendment supporters and gun control advocates will be closely watching this case as it develops.The decision will have great impact on the future of the 2A Rights vs. Gun Control Agenda legislative battles on the heels of President Joe #Bidens's arguably over-reaching executive orders aimed at the right to carry. Lt. Col. (Ret) Tony Shaffer and Lt. Col. (British Army, Ret.) Tim Wilson discuss the importance of the case, its residual effects and what it means for the future of Constitutional Rights protections as well as infringements. hank you for watching; please feel free to comment, share and subscribe.Or, please feel free to make a contribution here: paypal.com/us/fundraiser/charity/1338653 Thought to Action is presented by the London Center for Policy Research https://www.londoncenter.org​Tony Shaffer is the President of the London Center for Policy Research, a retired Lt. Col. in the US Army and the man who exposed intelligence failures prior to the 9/11/01 attacks. https://www.londoncenter.org/fellows/... Tim Wilson is a Senior Fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, a retired Lt. Col. in the British Army and leader of the LCPR 2nd Amendment Project. https://www.londoncenter.org/fellows/...

Strap in for another episode of TacticalPay Radio! This week, we've got a bit more of a local political feel, with a show all about covering gun policy in the state of New York. Our guest is Jacob Rieper of GunPoliticsNY, a blog that focuses on the politics affecting the rights of citizens to own, carry and use firearms for all lawful purposes in the state of New York. Jacob Rieper has been a defender of the 2nd Amendment since he was running Compuserve forums in the mid-1990's. In addition to his current blogging activities, he has honed his skills in the legislative process from introduction to signing, policy analysis and research, communicating with elected officials on legislative matters, developing political strategy, surveying candidates for public office, political campaign research, grassroots communication, writing press releases, communicating with the media on relevant legislative and political matters. From 2000 to 2016, Jacob was the Legislative Director of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association. For more information and to view the show notes, visit: https://www.tacticalpay.com/podcast/