POPULARITY
3 episodes with pistol association inc
3 episodes with pistol association inc
3 episodes with pistol association inc
2 episodes with pistol association inc
2 episodes with pistol association inc
2 episodes with pistol association inc
Next week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in one of the most significant—and potentially deadly—cases of the term - United States v Rahimi. The case, a follow on from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, has the potential to weaponize the court's Second Amendment extremism against victims of domestic abuse and protect adjudicated abusers. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by gun safety advocate Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, to find out the potential real life-and-death consequences of pursuing originalism literally back to when women were property and muskets were muzzle-loaded. They also discuss why the right is so keen to pursue gun rights through the courts, rather than through the democratic process. In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Jay Willis, editor in chief of Balls and Strikes, to discuss oral arguments in a pair of cases concerning First Amendment concerns when politicians block dissenting voices on social media, the Trump-related trademark t-shirt dispute that is barely SFW, and Justice Clarence Thomas's personal luxury RV loan forgiveness program. Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show. Dahlia's book Lady Justice: Women, the Law and the Battle to Save America, is also available as an audiobook, and Amicus listeners can get a 25 percent discount by entering the code “AMICUS” at checkout. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Next week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in one of the most significant—and potentially deadly—cases of the term - United States v Rahimi. The case, a follow on from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, has the potential to weaponize the court's Second Amendment extremism against victims of domestic abuse and protect adjudicated abusers. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by gun safety advocate Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, to find out the potential real life-and-death consequences of pursuing originalism literally back to when women were property and muskets were muzzle-loaded. They also discuss why the right is so keen to pursue gun rights through the courts, rather than through the democratic process. In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Jay Willis, editor in chief of Balls and Strikes, to discuss oral arguments in a pair of cases concerning First Amendment concerns when politicians block dissenting voices on social media, the Trump-related trademark t-shirt dispute that is barely SFW, and Justice Clarence Thomas's personal luxury RV loan forgiveness program. Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show. Dahlia's book Lady Justice: Women, the Law and the Battle to Save America, is also available as an audiobook, and Amicus listeners can get a 25 percent discount by entering the code “AMICUS” at checkout. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Next week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in one of the most significant—and potentially deadly—cases of the term - United States v Rahimi. The case, a follow on from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, has the potential to weaponize the court's Second Amendment extremism against victims of domestic abuse and protect adjudicated abusers. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by gun safety advocate Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, to find out the potential real life-and-death consequences of pursuing originalism literally back to when women were property and muskets were muzzle-loaded. They also discuss why the right is so keen to pursue gun rights through the courts, rather than through the democratic process. In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Jay Willis, editor in chief of Balls and Strikes, to discuss oral arguments in a pair of cases concerning First Amendment concerns when politicians block dissenting voices on social media, the Trump-related trademark t-shirt dispute that is barely SFW, and Justice Clarence Thomas's personal luxury RV loan forgiveness program. Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show. Dahlia's book Lady Justice: Women, the Law and the Battle to Save America, is also available as an audiobook, and Amicus listeners can get a 25 percent discount by entering the code “AMICUS” at checkout. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Next week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in one of the most significant—and potentially deadly—cases of the term - United States v Rahimi. The case, a follow on from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, has the potential to weaponize the court's Second Amendment extremism against victims of domestic abuse and protect adjudicated abusers. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by gun safety advocate Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, to find out the potential real life-and-death consequences of pursuing originalism literally back to when women were property and muskets were muzzle-loaded. They also discuss why the right is so keen to pursue gun rights through the courts, rather than through the democratic process. In this week's Amicus Plus segment, Dahlia is joined by Jay Willis, editor in chief of Balls and Strikes, to discuss oral arguments in a pair of cases concerning First Amendment concerns when politicians block dissenting voices on social media, the Trump-related trademark t-shirt dispute that is barely SFW, and Justice Clarence Thomas's personal luxury RV loan forgiveness program. Sign up for Slate Plus now to listen and support our show. Dahlia's book Lady Justice: Women, the Law and the Battle to Save America, is also available as an audiobook, and Amicus listeners can get a 25 percent discount by entering the code “AMICUS” at checkout. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
In this episode of the Duke Law Podcast, Andrew Willinger, executive director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law, discusses 'United States v. Rahimi' – the first major Second Amendment case to be heard by the Court since its landmark ruling in 'New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen last summer' – leading up to the Supreme Court hearing oral argument on November 7. The 'Rahimi' case has garnered national attention from gun rights advocates and Second Amendment scholars, as well as the general public, as it could potentially be the Court's first opportunity to clarify certain aspects of its 'Bruen' test that have since divided lower-court judges. The Court's decision in Rahimi may indicate how broad of an impact 'Bruen' will have in the years to come. 3L Sydney Colopy, a research assistant at the Center for Firearms Law, is the guest host. [Link to transcript forthcoming]
In this episode, a panel of libertarian and conservative scholars—J. Joel Alicea of the Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law, Anastasia Boden of the Cato Institute, and Sherif Girgis of Notre Dame Law School—explore the different strands of originalism as a constitutional methodology. They also explore the Roberts Court's application of originalism in recent cases, and how originalism intersects with textualism and other interpretive approaches. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. This program was originally streamed live on June 28, 2023. Additional Resources Moore v. Harper (2023) New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen (2023) Grutter v. Bollinger (2002) District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) Counterman v. Colorado (2023) J. Joel Alicea, “The Moral Authority of Original Meaning,” Notre Dame Law Review (2022) Joel Alicea, “Originalism and the Rule of the Dead,” National Affairs (2022) Sherif Girgis, “Living Traditionalism,” N.Y.U. L.Rev (2023) Sherif Gergis, “Dobb's History and the future of Abortion Laws,” SCOTUSblog (2022) Anastasia Boden, “Supreme Court's Sidestep Leaves Native Kids Without Answers,” Volokh Conspiracy (June 2023) Anastasia Boden, “Discourse: Irrational Basis,” Pacific Legal Foundation, (August 2022) Stay Connected and Learn More Continue the conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. Please subscribe to Live at the National Constitution Center and our companion podcast We the People on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app.
A panel of libertarian and conservative scholars—J. Joel Alicea of The Catholic University of America Columbus School of Law, Anastasia Boden of the Cato Institute, and Sherif Girgis of Notre Dame Law School—join for an in-depth comparative look at the different strands of originalism as a constitutional methodology. We explore originalism's modern history and application by current members of the Roberts Court through the examples of recent cases, and how originalism intersects with textualism and other interpretive approaches. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. Additional Resources Moore v. Harper (2023) New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen (2023) Grutter v. Bollinger (2002) District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) National Constitution Center, "Second Amendment," Interactive Constitution Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) Counterman v. Colorado (2023) John O. McGinnis and Michael B. Rappaport, Originalism and the Good Constitution Randy Barnett and Evan Bernick, "The Letter and the Spirit: A Unified Theory of Originalism," Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works Stay Connected and Learn More Continue the conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. Please subscribe to Live at the National Constitution Center and our companion podcast We the People on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app.
The U.S. Supreme Court decides some of the most challenging and important constitutional and statutory issues facing America through its interpretive methodologies. In this episode, we explore the various approaches to constitutional interpretation and key doctrines—including originalism, textualism, and the major questions doctrine—through the lens of recent Supreme Court cases with Solicitors General Ben Flowers of Ohio and Caroline Van Zile of Washington, D.C. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. This program is presented in partnership with the Center for Excellence in Governance at the National Association of Attorneys General. Additional Resources “The Major Questions Doctrine,” Congressional Research Service Steven Calabresi, “On Originalism in Constitutional Interpretation,” Constitution Daily blog “Textualism,” Cornell Law School: Legal Information Institute Alabama Association of Realtors v. Department of Health and Human Services (2021) Biden v. Nebraska Bostock v. Clayton County (2020) Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022 Missouri v. Biden National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2022 New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen (2022) West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (2022) Stay Connected and Learn More Continue the conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. Please subscribe to Live at the National Constitution Center and our companion podcast We the People on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app.
The National Constitution Center and the National Association of Attorneys General host a bipartisan conversation with Dan Schweitzer, director and chief counsel of the National Association of Attorneys General Center for Supreme Court Advocacy; Lindsay See, solicitor general of West Virginia; and Barbara Underwood, solicitor general of New York, exploring the history of the office of the solicitor general, the role of state solicitors in litigating cases before the Supreme Court, and some of the landmark cases they have litigated. Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, moderates. This program is presented in partnership with the Center for Excellence in Governance at the National Association of Attorneys General. Additional Resources Lydia Wheeler,State Solicitors General to Have Big Week at US Supreme Court, Bloomberg Law New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen (2022) New York v. New Jersey West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (2022) National Constitution Center, "Domestic Violence Laws and Gun Rights," We the People podcast Trump v. New York (2020) Department of Commerice v. New York (2019) Dawson v. Steager (2018) Stay Connected and Learn More Continue the conversation on Facebook and Twitter using @ConstitutionCtr. Sign up to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate, at bit.ly/constitutionweekly. Please subscribe to Live at the National Constitution Center and our companion podcast We the People on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app.
This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily Newsbrief, for Tuesday, November 8th, 2022. I hope you all had a wonderful weekend with you and yours. And happy election day by the way! Get out and VOTE today, as it is our duty as Christians to work to shape this nation in God’s image. Without further adieu, let’s get you caught up on the news: https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-elon-musk-endorses-gop-in-midterms?utm_campaign=64487 Elon Musk endorses GOP in midterms In a tweet posted on Monday morning, less than 24 hours before Election Day, new Twitter owner Elon Musk recommended that Americans vote for Republican candidates during their visit to the polls tomorrow. In a tweet addressed to "independent-minded voters," Musk wrote, "Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic." https://rumble.com/v153b3f-elon-musk-says-he-will-vote-for-republicans-this-election.html -Play Video Musk’s tweet comes as Republican candidates in key states have either taken the lead or have come within striking distance of their Democrat counterparts. In Arizona’s Senate race, incumbent Mark Kelly is up just one point, according to RealClearPolitics’ average of polls. In the state’s gubernatorial race, Republican candidate Kari Lake is up 1.8 points. In Pennsylvania, GOP Senate candidate Mehmet Oz is up 0.1 percent over Democrat John Letterman. In a poll from Trafalgar, Republican candidate Doug Mastriano is down just 4.3 points. In the blue state of New York, gubernatorial incumbent Kathy Hochul holds a 6.2 point lead over Lee Zeldin, who has quickly closed the gap ahead of Election Day. Independent polls have pointed to Zeldin taking the lead. In Florida’s governor race, incumbent Ron DeSantis holds an 11.5 point lead over Democrat challenger Charlie Crist, according to RealClearPolitics. Even in the deep blue states on the west coast, Republican challengers are closing the gap. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/07/consumer-confidence-in-housing-hits-new-low-says-fannie-mae.html Consumer confidence in the housing market hits a new low, according to Fannie Mae Rising mortgage rates, high home prices and uncertainty in the overall economy have Americans feeling more pessimistic about the state of the housing market. In October, just 16% of consumers said they thought now is a good time to buy a home, according to a monthly survey by Fannie Mae. That is the lowest share since the survey began in 2011. The share of respondents who thought now is a good time to sell a home also dropped from 59% to 51%. Fannie Mae’s survey looks not just at buying and selling but tests sentiment about home prices, mortgage rates and the job market. It combines them all into one number, which also fell for the eighth straight month and now sits at a new low. A higher share of consumers, 37%, said they expect home prices to drop in the next 12 months. That compares with 35% in September. More also believe mortgage rates will rise. Fast-rising interest rates are what turned the red-hot housing market on its heels in early summer. The average rate on the popular 30-year fixed mortgage started the year near a record low, around 3%. By June it crossed 6%, and it’s now just over 7%, according to Mortgage News Daily. “As continued affordability constraints reduce homebuyer demand, and homeowners become reluctant to sell at potentially reduced prices, we expect home sales to slow even further in the coming months, consistent with our forecast,” wrote Doug Duncan, Fannie Mae’s chief economist, in a release. Home prices dropped again in September, according to Black Knight, albeit at a slower monthly pace than they did in July and August. Prices are now down 2.6% since June, the first three-month decline since 2018, when interest rates also rose. It is the worst three-month stretch for home prices since early 2009. Prices, however, were still 10.7% higher in September than the same month last year. https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-blocks-ny-gun-law-excoriates-democrats-trying-to-eviscerate-the-bill-of-rights Judge Blocks NY Gun Law, Excoriates Democrats Trying To ‘Eviscerate The Bill Of Rights’ A Trump-appointed judge in New York last week blocked a gun law from taking effect and took Democrats to task for trying to “eviscerate the Bill of Rights.” U.S. District Judge John Sinatra Jr. issued an injunction blocking a gun law that bars people in New York from bearing arms in places of worship. “The court reiterates that ample Supreme Court precedent addressing the individuals right to keep and bear arms – from Heller and McDonald to its June 2022 decision in [New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen] – dictates that New York’s new place of worship restriction is equally unconstitutional,” Sinatra said, The Daily Caller reported. “The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are the Status quo – not 2022 legislation on the books for nine weeks,” the judge continued, taking aim at the Democrat-controlled New York legislature. “Legislative enactments may not eviscerate the Bill of Rights. Every day they do is one too many.” “The nation’s history does not countenance such an incursion into the right to keep and bear arms across all places of worship across the state,” Sinatra wrote. “The right to self defense is no less important and no less recognized at these places.” The federal judge in October issued a temporary hold on the law, similarly writing, “In Bruen, the Court made the Second Amendment test crystal clear: regulations in this area is permissible only if the government demonstrates that the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of sufficiently analogous regulations. … New York fails that test. The State’s exclusion is, instead, inconsistent with the Nation’s historical traditions.” In its New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in June ruled that longtime restrictions New York placed on carrying concealed firearms run in violation of Americans’ Second and 14th Amendment rights, The Daily Wire reported. The case centered on a 1911 New York state law that conditioned the right to a concealed carry permit on “good moral character” and “proper cause.” The Supreme Court majority opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, took issue with the latter condition, which unlawfully forced New Yorkers to demonstrate “a special need for self-defense.” “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need,” Thomas wrote. “That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.” FLF Magazine: We are on a mission to make magazines great again. So, subscribe to our Fight Laugh Feast magazine. This is a quarterly mini-book like experience, packed full of a variety of authors that includes theologically-driven cultural commentary, a Psalm of the quarter, recipes for feasting, laughter sprinkled throughout the glossy pages, and more. Sign your church up, sign your grumpy uncle up, and while you are at it…sign up the Pope, Elon Musk, and Russel Moore. Disclaimer: This magazine will guarantee various responses and CrossPolitic is not held liable for any of them. Reading the whole magazine may cause theological maturation, possibly encourage your kids to take the Lord’s Supper with you, and will likely cause you to randomly chuckle in joy at God’s wondrous world. In addition to all of the above… starting next year, if you’re a platinum club member, you’ll get a magazine subscription for free! So if you’re not a club member yet… Sign up today! Four issues and $60 per year (unless you’re a platinum club member), that is it. Go to fightlaughfeast.com right now to sign up!. https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-press-sec-says-bidens-words-were-twisted-when-he-said-he-wanted-to-shut-down-coal-plants?utm_campaign=64487 Press sec says Biden's 'words were twisted' when he said he wanted to shut down coal plants During a White House press briefing on Monday, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked about Joe Biden's remarks on Friday where he promised to shut down coal plants across the country and she said it was "a bit loud and hard to hear." https://rumble.com/v1sb6as-november-7-2022.html - Play Video On Friday, Biden promised to permanently end coal production in the United States while speaking in Carlsbad, California at a political event "touting his administration's economic policies." Biden claimed that the US is going to "become a wind generation" and "it’s going to save them a hell of a lot of money and using the same transmission line that they transmitted the coal-fired electric on, we're going to be shutting these plants down all across America and having wind and solar power." In response Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, said on Saturday that President Biden's comments were "outrageous" and that the president owed coal miners an "immediate and public apology." After Manchin's response, Jean-Pierre put out a statement that read, "The President’s remarks yesterday have been twisted to suggest a meaning that was not intended; he regrets it if anyone hearing these remarks took offense." "The President was commenting on a fact of economics and technology: as it has been from its earliest days as an energy superpower, America is once again in the midst of an energy transition," the statement read, indicating that the US must embrace "clean and efficient American energy." Armored Republic The Mission of Armored Republic is to Honor Christ by equipping Free Men with Tools of Liberty necessary to preserve God-given rights. In the Armored Republic there is no King but Christ. We are Free Craftsmen. Body Armor is a Tool of Liberty. We create Tools of Liberty. Free men must remain ever vigilant against tyranny wherever it appears. God has given us the tools of liberty needed to defend the rights He bestowed to us. Armored Republic is honored to offer you those Tools. Visit them, at ar500armor.com https://www.theepochtimes.com/court-orders-true-the-vote-leaders-released-from-jail_4846717.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Court Orders Release of True the Vote Leaders From Jail Two leaders of the election integrity group True the Vote were released from jail after an appeals court overruled a judge’s order that they be detained for contempt of court. Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips were ordered released by a panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit late on Nov. 6. “IT IS ORDERED that Petitioners’ opposed motion for release from detention is GRANTED pending further order of this court,” the panel said in the order, which was obtained by The Epoch Times. The panel consisted of Circuit Judges Catharina Haynes, a George W. Bush appointee; Kurt Engelhardt, a Donald Trump appointee; and Andrew Oldham, a Trump appointee. Engelbrecht and Phillips were released on Nov. 7. Engelbrecht and Phillips were sent to jail on Oct. 31 by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt, a Reagan appointee, who found them in contempt of court for not revealing the identities of people who allegedly accessed information from Konnech, a Michigan-based election management software company whose founder was recently arrested for allegedly stealing poll worker data and hosting the information on servers in China. The order for confinement was to be in place until the defendants “fully comply” with an order that they reveal certain information, including the identities, Hoyt said. Engelbrecht and Phillips say they passed on information that was legally obtained from Konnech to the FBI. One of their attorneys identified one of the individuals in question, Mike Hasson, during an October hearing. But they have declined to share the name of the second person. Both the individuals are FBI informants, Phillips asserted during one hearing. The contempt order came after Konnech sued True the Vote and its founders for defamation. In its opposition to the petition, Konnech said that the True the Vote founders were trying to “strip the District Court of its contempt power” and that they “have no one but themselves to blame for their confinement” after defying Hoyt’s order. Lawyers for the firm said, “Petitioners’ imprisonment is not an emergency especially in this case where the Petitioners are contemnors and recalcitrant witnesses who hold the keys to the jailhouse, and can free themselves immediately upon purging their contempt.” Alright, now it’s time for my favorite topic, sports! Last week, the Houston Astros, did this: The Astros win the World Series! Play 0:00-0:17 https://nypost.com/2022/11/06/dusty-baker-finally-wins-world-series-as-a-manager/ HOUSTON — The Astros’ manager stood on the stage where the World Series trophy was presented late Saturday night and channeled his inner Jimmy Johnson. “How about those Astros!” Dusty Baker said. After 25 seasons managing in the major leagues and two previous trips to the World Series, Baker is finally a world champion manager. With the Astros’ 4-1 victory over the Phillies in Game 6, the 73-year-old Baker became the oldest manager to lead a team to a World Series title. Hired to stabilize the organization before the 2020 season — in the aftermath of the team’s sign-stealing scheme from 2017 that cost former manager A.J. Hinch his job — Baker might now be the most popular man in Texas. Baker took the Giants to Game 7 of the World Series in 2002 before they lost to the Angels. Under his guidance last season, the Astros made it to the World Series before losing to the Braves in six games. The Astros rolled to the AL West title this season, winning 106 games, before starting the postseason 7-0 with ALDS and ALCS sweeps of the Mariners and Yankees, respectively. The Phillies, however, jumped ahead 2-1 in the World Series, before the Astros closed it out with three straight victories.
This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily Newsbrief, for Tuesday, November 8th, 2022. I hope you all had a wonderful weekend with you and yours. And happy election day by the way! Get out and VOTE today, as it is our duty as Christians to work to shape this nation in God’s image. Without further adieu, let’s get you caught up on the news: https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-elon-musk-endorses-gop-in-midterms?utm_campaign=64487 Elon Musk endorses GOP in midterms In a tweet posted on Monday morning, less than 24 hours before Election Day, new Twitter owner Elon Musk recommended that Americans vote for Republican candidates during their visit to the polls tomorrow. In a tweet addressed to "independent-minded voters," Musk wrote, "Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic." https://rumble.com/v153b3f-elon-musk-says-he-will-vote-for-republicans-this-election.html -Play Video Musk’s tweet comes as Republican candidates in key states have either taken the lead or have come within striking distance of their Democrat counterparts. In Arizona’s Senate race, incumbent Mark Kelly is up just one point, according to RealClearPolitics’ average of polls. In the state’s gubernatorial race, Republican candidate Kari Lake is up 1.8 points. In Pennsylvania, GOP Senate candidate Mehmet Oz is up 0.1 percent over Democrat John Letterman. In a poll from Trafalgar, Republican candidate Doug Mastriano is down just 4.3 points. In the blue state of New York, gubernatorial incumbent Kathy Hochul holds a 6.2 point lead over Lee Zeldin, who has quickly closed the gap ahead of Election Day. Independent polls have pointed to Zeldin taking the lead. In Florida’s governor race, incumbent Ron DeSantis holds an 11.5 point lead over Democrat challenger Charlie Crist, according to RealClearPolitics. Even in the deep blue states on the west coast, Republican challengers are closing the gap. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/07/consumer-confidence-in-housing-hits-new-low-says-fannie-mae.html Consumer confidence in the housing market hits a new low, according to Fannie Mae Rising mortgage rates, high home prices and uncertainty in the overall economy have Americans feeling more pessimistic about the state of the housing market. In October, just 16% of consumers said they thought now is a good time to buy a home, according to a monthly survey by Fannie Mae. That is the lowest share since the survey began in 2011. The share of respondents who thought now is a good time to sell a home also dropped from 59% to 51%. Fannie Mae’s survey looks not just at buying and selling but tests sentiment about home prices, mortgage rates and the job market. It combines them all into one number, which also fell for the eighth straight month and now sits at a new low. A higher share of consumers, 37%, said they expect home prices to drop in the next 12 months. That compares with 35% in September. More also believe mortgage rates will rise. Fast-rising interest rates are what turned the red-hot housing market on its heels in early summer. The average rate on the popular 30-year fixed mortgage started the year near a record low, around 3%. By June it crossed 6%, and it’s now just over 7%, according to Mortgage News Daily. “As continued affordability constraints reduce homebuyer demand, and homeowners become reluctant to sell at potentially reduced prices, we expect home sales to slow even further in the coming months, consistent with our forecast,” wrote Doug Duncan, Fannie Mae’s chief economist, in a release. Home prices dropped again in September, according to Black Knight, albeit at a slower monthly pace than they did in July and August. Prices are now down 2.6% since June, the first three-month decline since 2018, when interest rates also rose. It is the worst three-month stretch for home prices since early 2009. Prices, however, were still 10.7% higher in September than the same month last year. https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-blocks-ny-gun-law-excoriates-democrats-trying-to-eviscerate-the-bill-of-rights Judge Blocks NY Gun Law, Excoriates Democrats Trying To ‘Eviscerate The Bill Of Rights’ A Trump-appointed judge in New York last week blocked a gun law from taking effect and took Democrats to task for trying to “eviscerate the Bill of Rights.” U.S. District Judge John Sinatra Jr. issued an injunction blocking a gun law that bars people in New York from bearing arms in places of worship. “The court reiterates that ample Supreme Court precedent addressing the individuals right to keep and bear arms – from Heller and McDonald to its June 2022 decision in [New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen] – dictates that New York’s new place of worship restriction is equally unconstitutional,” Sinatra said, The Daily Caller reported. “The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are the Status quo – not 2022 legislation on the books for nine weeks,” the judge continued, taking aim at the Democrat-controlled New York legislature. “Legislative enactments may not eviscerate the Bill of Rights. Every day they do is one too many.” “The nation’s history does not countenance such an incursion into the right to keep and bear arms across all places of worship across the state,” Sinatra wrote. “The right to self defense is no less important and no less recognized at these places.” The federal judge in October issued a temporary hold on the law, similarly writing, “In Bruen, the Court made the Second Amendment test crystal clear: regulations in this area is permissible only if the government demonstrates that the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of sufficiently analogous regulations. … New York fails that test. The State’s exclusion is, instead, inconsistent with the Nation’s historical traditions.” In its New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in June ruled that longtime restrictions New York placed on carrying concealed firearms run in violation of Americans’ Second and 14th Amendment rights, The Daily Wire reported. The case centered on a 1911 New York state law that conditioned the right to a concealed carry permit on “good moral character” and “proper cause.” The Supreme Court majority opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, took issue with the latter condition, which unlawfully forced New Yorkers to demonstrate “a special need for self-defense.” “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need,” Thomas wrote. “That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.” FLF Magazine: We are on a mission to make magazines great again. So, subscribe to our Fight Laugh Feast magazine. This is a quarterly mini-book like experience, packed full of a variety of authors that includes theologically-driven cultural commentary, a Psalm of the quarter, recipes for feasting, laughter sprinkled throughout the glossy pages, and more. Sign your church up, sign your grumpy uncle up, and while you are at it…sign up the Pope, Elon Musk, and Russel Moore. Disclaimer: This magazine will guarantee various responses and CrossPolitic is not held liable for any of them. Reading the whole magazine may cause theological maturation, possibly encourage your kids to take the Lord’s Supper with you, and will likely cause you to randomly chuckle in joy at God’s wondrous world. In addition to all of the above… starting next year, if you’re a platinum club member, you’ll get a magazine subscription for free! So if you’re not a club member yet… Sign up today! Four issues and $60 per year (unless you’re a platinum club member), that is it. Go to fightlaughfeast.com right now to sign up!. https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-press-sec-says-bidens-words-were-twisted-when-he-said-he-wanted-to-shut-down-coal-plants?utm_campaign=64487 Press sec says Biden's 'words were twisted' when he said he wanted to shut down coal plants During a White House press briefing on Monday, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked about Joe Biden's remarks on Friday where he promised to shut down coal plants across the country and she said it was "a bit loud and hard to hear." https://rumble.com/v1sb6as-november-7-2022.html - Play Video On Friday, Biden promised to permanently end coal production in the United States while speaking in Carlsbad, California at a political event "touting his administration's economic policies." Biden claimed that the US is going to "become a wind generation" and "it’s going to save them a hell of a lot of money and using the same transmission line that they transmitted the coal-fired electric on, we're going to be shutting these plants down all across America and having wind and solar power." In response Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, said on Saturday that President Biden's comments were "outrageous" and that the president owed coal miners an "immediate and public apology." After Manchin's response, Jean-Pierre put out a statement that read, "The President’s remarks yesterday have been twisted to suggest a meaning that was not intended; he regrets it if anyone hearing these remarks took offense." "The President was commenting on a fact of economics and technology: as it has been from its earliest days as an energy superpower, America is once again in the midst of an energy transition," the statement read, indicating that the US must embrace "clean and efficient American energy." Armored Republic The Mission of Armored Republic is to Honor Christ by equipping Free Men with Tools of Liberty necessary to preserve God-given rights. In the Armored Republic there is no King but Christ. We are Free Craftsmen. Body Armor is a Tool of Liberty. We create Tools of Liberty. Free men must remain ever vigilant against tyranny wherever it appears. God has given us the tools of liberty needed to defend the rights He bestowed to us. Armored Republic is honored to offer you those Tools. Visit them, at ar500armor.com https://www.theepochtimes.com/court-orders-true-the-vote-leaders-released-from-jail_4846717.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Court Orders Release of True the Vote Leaders From Jail Two leaders of the election integrity group True the Vote were released from jail after an appeals court overruled a judge’s order that they be detained for contempt of court. Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips were ordered released by a panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit late on Nov. 6. “IT IS ORDERED that Petitioners’ opposed motion for release from detention is GRANTED pending further order of this court,” the panel said in the order, which was obtained by The Epoch Times. The panel consisted of Circuit Judges Catharina Haynes, a George W. Bush appointee; Kurt Engelhardt, a Donald Trump appointee; and Andrew Oldham, a Trump appointee. Engelbrecht and Phillips were released on Nov. 7. Engelbrecht and Phillips were sent to jail on Oct. 31 by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt, a Reagan appointee, who found them in contempt of court for not revealing the identities of people who allegedly accessed information from Konnech, a Michigan-based election management software company whose founder was recently arrested for allegedly stealing poll worker data and hosting the information on servers in China. The order for confinement was to be in place until the defendants “fully comply” with an order that they reveal certain information, including the identities, Hoyt said. Engelbrecht and Phillips say they passed on information that was legally obtained from Konnech to the FBI. One of their attorneys identified one of the individuals in question, Mike Hasson, during an October hearing. But they have declined to share the name of the second person. Both the individuals are FBI informants, Phillips asserted during one hearing. The contempt order came after Konnech sued True the Vote and its founders for defamation. In its opposition to the petition, Konnech said that the True the Vote founders were trying to “strip the District Court of its contempt power” and that they “have no one but themselves to blame for their confinement” after defying Hoyt’s order. Lawyers for the firm said, “Petitioners’ imprisonment is not an emergency especially in this case where the Petitioners are contemnors and recalcitrant witnesses who hold the keys to the jailhouse, and can free themselves immediately upon purging their contempt.” Alright, now it’s time for my favorite topic, sports! Last week, the Houston Astros, did this: The Astros win the World Series! Play 0:00-0:17 https://nypost.com/2022/11/06/dusty-baker-finally-wins-world-series-as-a-manager/ HOUSTON — The Astros’ manager stood on the stage where the World Series trophy was presented late Saturday night and channeled his inner Jimmy Johnson. “How about those Astros!” Dusty Baker said. After 25 seasons managing in the major leagues and two previous trips to the World Series, Baker is finally a world champion manager. With the Astros’ 4-1 victory over the Phillies in Game 6, the 73-year-old Baker became the oldest manager to lead a team to a World Series title. Hired to stabilize the organization before the 2020 season — in the aftermath of the team’s sign-stealing scheme from 2017 that cost former manager A.J. Hinch his job — Baker might now be the most popular man in Texas. Baker took the Giants to Game 7 of the World Series in 2002 before they lost to the Angels. Under his guidance last season, the Astros made it to the World Series before losing to the Braves in six games. The Astros rolled to the AL West title this season, winning 106 games, before starting the postseason 7-0 with ALDS and ALCS sweeps of the Mariners and Yankees, respectively. The Phillies, however, jumped ahead 2-1 in the World Series, before the Astros closed it out with three straight victories.
This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily Newsbrief, for Tuesday, November 8th, 2022. I hope you all had a wonderful weekend with you and yours. And happy election day by the way! Get out and VOTE today, as it is our duty as Christians to work to shape this nation in God’s image. Without further adieu, let’s get you caught up on the news: https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-elon-musk-endorses-gop-in-midterms?utm_campaign=64487 Elon Musk endorses GOP in midterms In a tweet posted on Monday morning, less than 24 hours before Election Day, new Twitter owner Elon Musk recommended that Americans vote for Republican candidates during their visit to the polls tomorrow. In a tweet addressed to "independent-minded voters," Musk wrote, "Shared power curbs the worst excesses of both parties, therefore I recommend voting for a Republican Congress, given that the Presidency is Democratic." https://rumble.com/v153b3f-elon-musk-says-he-will-vote-for-republicans-this-election.html -Play Video Musk’s tweet comes as Republican candidates in key states have either taken the lead or have come within striking distance of their Democrat counterparts. In Arizona’s Senate race, incumbent Mark Kelly is up just one point, according to RealClearPolitics’ average of polls. In the state’s gubernatorial race, Republican candidate Kari Lake is up 1.8 points. In Pennsylvania, GOP Senate candidate Mehmet Oz is up 0.1 percent over Democrat John Letterman. In a poll from Trafalgar, Republican candidate Doug Mastriano is down just 4.3 points. In the blue state of New York, gubernatorial incumbent Kathy Hochul holds a 6.2 point lead over Lee Zeldin, who has quickly closed the gap ahead of Election Day. Independent polls have pointed to Zeldin taking the lead. In Florida’s governor race, incumbent Ron DeSantis holds an 11.5 point lead over Democrat challenger Charlie Crist, according to RealClearPolitics. Even in the deep blue states on the west coast, Republican challengers are closing the gap. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/07/consumer-confidence-in-housing-hits-new-low-says-fannie-mae.html Consumer confidence in the housing market hits a new low, according to Fannie Mae Rising mortgage rates, high home prices and uncertainty in the overall economy have Americans feeling more pessimistic about the state of the housing market. In October, just 16% of consumers said they thought now is a good time to buy a home, according to a monthly survey by Fannie Mae. That is the lowest share since the survey began in 2011. The share of respondents who thought now is a good time to sell a home also dropped from 59% to 51%. Fannie Mae’s survey looks not just at buying and selling but tests sentiment about home prices, mortgage rates and the job market. It combines them all into one number, which also fell for the eighth straight month and now sits at a new low. A higher share of consumers, 37%, said they expect home prices to drop in the next 12 months. That compares with 35% in September. More also believe mortgage rates will rise. Fast-rising interest rates are what turned the red-hot housing market on its heels in early summer. The average rate on the popular 30-year fixed mortgage started the year near a record low, around 3%. By June it crossed 6%, and it’s now just over 7%, according to Mortgage News Daily. “As continued affordability constraints reduce homebuyer demand, and homeowners become reluctant to sell at potentially reduced prices, we expect home sales to slow even further in the coming months, consistent with our forecast,” wrote Doug Duncan, Fannie Mae’s chief economist, in a release. Home prices dropped again in September, according to Black Knight, albeit at a slower monthly pace than they did in July and August. Prices are now down 2.6% since June, the first three-month decline since 2018, when interest rates also rose. It is the worst three-month stretch for home prices since early 2009. Prices, however, were still 10.7% higher in September than the same month last year. https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-blocks-ny-gun-law-excoriates-democrats-trying-to-eviscerate-the-bill-of-rights Judge Blocks NY Gun Law, Excoriates Democrats Trying To ‘Eviscerate The Bill Of Rights’ A Trump-appointed judge in New York last week blocked a gun law from taking effect and took Democrats to task for trying to “eviscerate the Bill of Rights.” U.S. District Judge John Sinatra Jr. issued an injunction blocking a gun law that bars people in New York from bearing arms in places of worship. “The court reiterates that ample Supreme Court precedent addressing the individuals right to keep and bear arms – from Heller and McDonald to its June 2022 decision in [New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen] – dictates that New York’s new place of worship restriction is equally unconstitutional,” Sinatra said, The Daily Caller reported. “The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are the Status quo – not 2022 legislation on the books for nine weeks,” the judge continued, taking aim at the Democrat-controlled New York legislature. “Legislative enactments may not eviscerate the Bill of Rights. Every day they do is one too many.” “The nation’s history does not countenance such an incursion into the right to keep and bear arms across all places of worship across the state,” Sinatra wrote. “The right to self defense is no less important and no less recognized at these places.” The federal judge in October issued a temporary hold on the law, similarly writing, “In Bruen, the Court made the Second Amendment test crystal clear: regulations in this area is permissible only if the government demonstrates that the regulation is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of sufficiently analogous regulations. … New York fails that test. The State’s exclusion is, instead, inconsistent with the Nation’s historical traditions.” In its New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in June ruled that longtime restrictions New York placed on carrying concealed firearms run in violation of Americans’ Second and 14th Amendment rights, The Daily Wire reported. The case centered on a 1911 New York state law that conditioned the right to a concealed carry permit on “good moral character” and “proper cause.” The Supreme Court majority opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, took issue with the latter condition, which unlawfully forced New Yorkers to demonstrate “a special need for self-defense.” “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need,” Thomas wrote. “That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense.” FLF Magazine: We are on a mission to make magazines great again. So, subscribe to our Fight Laugh Feast magazine. This is a quarterly mini-book like experience, packed full of a variety of authors that includes theologically-driven cultural commentary, a Psalm of the quarter, recipes for feasting, laughter sprinkled throughout the glossy pages, and more. Sign your church up, sign your grumpy uncle up, and while you are at it…sign up the Pope, Elon Musk, and Russel Moore. Disclaimer: This magazine will guarantee various responses and CrossPolitic is not held liable for any of them. Reading the whole magazine may cause theological maturation, possibly encourage your kids to take the Lord’s Supper with you, and will likely cause you to randomly chuckle in joy at God’s wondrous world. In addition to all of the above… starting next year, if you’re a platinum club member, you’ll get a magazine subscription for free! So if you’re not a club member yet… Sign up today! Four issues and $60 per year (unless you’re a platinum club member), that is it. Go to fightlaughfeast.com right now to sign up!. https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-press-sec-says-bidens-words-were-twisted-when-he-said-he-wanted-to-shut-down-coal-plants?utm_campaign=64487 Press sec says Biden's 'words were twisted' when he said he wanted to shut down coal plants During a White House press briefing on Monday, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked about Joe Biden's remarks on Friday where he promised to shut down coal plants across the country and she said it was "a bit loud and hard to hear." https://rumble.com/v1sb6as-november-7-2022.html - Play Video On Friday, Biden promised to permanently end coal production in the United States while speaking in Carlsbad, California at a political event "touting his administration's economic policies." Biden claimed that the US is going to "become a wind generation" and "it’s going to save them a hell of a lot of money and using the same transmission line that they transmitted the coal-fired electric on, we're going to be shutting these plants down all across America and having wind and solar power." In response Joe Manchin, the Democratic senator from West Virginia, said on Saturday that President Biden's comments were "outrageous" and that the president owed coal miners an "immediate and public apology." After Manchin's response, Jean-Pierre put out a statement that read, "The President’s remarks yesterday have been twisted to suggest a meaning that was not intended; he regrets it if anyone hearing these remarks took offense." "The President was commenting on a fact of economics and technology: as it has been from its earliest days as an energy superpower, America is once again in the midst of an energy transition," the statement read, indicating that the US must embrace "clean and efficient American energy." Armored Republic The Mission of Armored Republic is to Honor Christ by equipping Free Men with Tools of Liberty necessary to preserve God-given rights. In the Armored Republic there is no King but Christ. We are Free Craftsmen. Body Armor is a Tool of Liberty. We create Tools of Liberty. Free men must remain ever vigilant against tyranny wherever it appears. God has given us the tools of liberty needed to defend the rights He bestowed to us. Armored Republic is honored to offer you those Tools. Visit them, at ar500armor.com https://www.theepochtimes.com/court-orders-true-the-vote-leaders-released-from-jail_4846717.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport Court Orders Release of True the Vote Leaders From Jail Two leaders of the election integrity group True the Vote were released from jail after an appeals court overruled a judge’s order that they be detained for contempt of court. Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips were ordered released by a panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit late on Nov. 6. “IT IS ORDERED that Petitioners’ opposed motion for release from detention is GRANTED pending further order of this court,” the panel said in the order, which was obtained by The Epoch Times. The panel consisted of Circuit Judges Catharina Haynes, a George W. Bush appointee; Kurt Engelhardt, a Donald Trump appointee; and Andrew Oldham, a Trump appointee. Engelbrecht and Phillips were released on Nov. 7. Engelbrecht and Phillips were sent to jail on Oct. 31 by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt, a Reagan appointee, who found them in contempt of court for not revealing the identities of people who allegedly accessed information from Konnech, a Michigan-based election management software company whose founder was recently arrested for allegedly stealing poll worker data and hosting the information on servers in China. The order for confinement was to be in place until the defendants “fully comply” with an order that they reveal certain information, including the identities, Hoyt said. Engelbrecht and Phillips say they passed on information that was legally obtained from Konnech to the FBI. One of their attorneys identified one of the individuals in question, Mike Hasson, during an October hearing. But they have declined to share the name of the second person. Both the individuals are FBI informants, Phillips asserted during one hearing. The contempt order came after Konnech sued True the Vote and its founders for defamation. In its opposition to the petition, Konnech said that the True the Vote founders were trying to “strip the District Court of its contempt power” and that they “have no one but themselves to blame for their confinement” after defying Hoyt’s order. Lawyers for the firm said, “Petitioners’ imprisonment is not an emergency especially in this case where the Petitioners are contemnors and recalcitrant witnesses who hold the keys to the jailhouse, and can free themselves immediately upon purging their contempt.” Alright, now it’s time for my favorite topic, sports! Last week, the Houston Astros, did this: The Astros win the World Series! Play 0:00-0:17 https://nypost.com/2022/11/06/dusty-baker-finally-wins-world-series-as-a-manager/ HOUSTON — The Astros’ manager stood on the stage where the World Series trophy was presented late Saturday night and channeled his inner Jimmy Johnson. “How about those Astros!” Dusty Baker said. After 25 seasons managing in the major leagues and two previous trips to the World Series, Baker is finally a world champion manager. With the Astros’ 4-1 victory over the Phillies in Game 6, the 73-year-old Baker became the oldest manager to lead a team to a World Series title. Hired to stabilize the organization before the 2020 season — in the aftermath of the team’s sign-stealing scheme from 2017 that cost former manager A.J. Hinch his job — Baker might now be the most popular man in Texas. Baker took the Giants to Game 7 of the World Series in 2002 before they lost to the Angels. Under his guidance last season, the Astros made it to the World Series before losing to the Braves in six games. The Astros rolled to the AL West title this season, winning 106 games, before starting the postseason 7-0 with ALDS and ALCS sweeps of the Mariners and Yankees, respectively. The Phillies, however, jumped ahead 2-1 in the World Series, before the Astros closed it out with three straight victories.
Sean Illing talks with Harvard Law professor Nikolas Bowie about the U.S. Supreme Court's recently-concluded term, which produced landmark opinions restricting the power of the EPA, expanding gun rights, and overturning Roe v. Wade. They discuss how the conservative court's arguments are structured and why they are in fact quite radical, what "legal liberalism" is and whether it has just been decisively repudiated, and whether there are any reforms that could stop the conservative majority from reshaping American jurisprudence. Host: Sean Illing (@seanilling), Interviews Writer, Vox Guest: Nikolas Bowie (@nikobowie), Louis D. Brandeis Professor of Law, Harvard Law School References: Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court, Public Meeting, Panel 1 (C-SPAN; June 30) "How the Supreme Court dominates our democracy" by Niko Bowie (Washington Post; July 16, 2021) A Twitter thread on the repudiation of legal liberalism, by @nikobowie Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health (SCOTUS; June 24) 42 U.S. Code §1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (1868) New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen (SCOTUS; June 23) Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (SCOTUS; June 29, 1992) Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don't Talk about It) by Elizabeth Anderson (Princeton; 2017) "A new Supreme Court case is the biggest threat to US democracy since January 6" by Ian Millhiser (Vox; June 30) Enjoyed this episode? Rate Vox Conversations ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Subscribe for free. Be the first to hear the next episode of Vox Conversations by subscribing in your favorite podcast app. Support Vox Conversations by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts This episode was made by: Producer: Erikk Geannikis Editor: Amy Drozdowska Engineer: Patrick Boyd Deputy Editorial Director, Vox Talk: Amber Hall Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
On June 23rd, 2022 the Supreme Court decided the landmark gun rights case New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. The case, widely seen as a win for advocates of personal gun rights, fundamentally altered the test that courts use to evaluate constitutionality under the 2nd Amendment and expanded gun rights outside of the home. Prof. Joseph Blocher of Duke Law School explains how Bruen fits into the evolving Second Amendment doctrine. In Bruen, Justice Thomas writing for the majority knocks down New York's concealed carry law and along with it calls into question laws in other states where significant discretion is given to the state in determining whether they may issue a permit. As Prof. Blocher explains, the case further replaces the two-part Second Amendment test used by the nation's circuit courts of appeals in favor of a new test focused on historical tradition. After analysis of the decision of the court as well as concurring and dissenting opinions, Blocher goes on to explore the impact of Bruen on laws and individuals across the nation.
On June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. In a 6-3 decision, the Court struck down New York's handgun licensing law that required New Yorkers to demonstrate a “proper cause” in order to be granted a license to carry a pistol or revolver in public. The petitioners, Brandon Koch and Robert Nash, were denied licenses to carry a firearm in public after listing their generalized interest in self-defense as the reason for seeking the license. New York denied their license application because a generalized interest in self-defense failed to satisfy the state's proper cause requirement. Both men sued, claiming that New York had violated their Second Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights in doing so. A district court dismissed their claims, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed.Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court, in the first major case on firearms regulation that the Court has considered in over a decade. Please join our legal expert to discuss the case, the legal issues involved, and the implications for the future of firearm regulation in America. Featuring:Prof. Mark W. Smith, Visiting Fellow in Pharmaceutical Public Policy and Law in the Department of Pharmacology, University of Oxford; Presidential Scholar and Senior Fellow in Law and Public Policy, The King's College; Distinguished Scholar and Senior Fellow of Law and Public Policy, Ave Maria School of Law
On June 23rd, 2022 the Supreme Court decided the landmark gun rights case New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. The case, widely seen as a win for advocates of personal gun rights, fundamentally altered the test that courts use to evaluate constitutionality under the 2nd Amendment and expanded gun rights outside of the home. Prof. Joseph Blocher of Duke Law School explains how Bruen fits into the evolving Second Amendment doctrine. In Bruen, Justice Thomas writing for the majority knocks down New York's concealed carry law and along with it calls into question laws in other states where significant discretion is given to the state in determining whether they may issue a permit. As Prof. Blocher explains, the case further replaces the two-part Second Amendment test used by the nation's circuit courts of appeals in favor of a new test focused on historical tradition. After analysis of the decision of the court as well as concurring and dissenting opinions, Blocher goes on to explore the impact of Bruen on laws and individuals across the nation.
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.
Recorded on 07/04/2022. After some time off, we're back with some big news. In this all SCOTUS episode, Frank and Reid talk about several recently decided SCOTUS cases. Topics range from free exercise of religion, over reaching bureaucracy, and much more. Be sure to tune in to hear what we think.If you enjoy our content, please remember to leave a rating and review where ever you get your podcasts. Be sure to also comment and subscribe to our show on Youtube. Please, share it with your friends to spread the word. You can send us your feedback and comments to us directly by email. Don't forget to check out our other podcast, the Wicky Wacky Radio Show. All info can be found below.Contact Us:Frank: contempconserv@gmail.comReid: contempconserv2@gmail.comFollow on TwitterOur Links:ContemporaryConservative.netConservative Conversations PodcastConservative Conversations on YoutubeThe Wicky Wacky Radio Show PodcastThe Wicky Wacky Radio Show on YoutubeReferences:Carson v. Makin- Legal Information InstituteCarson v. Makin- The Federalist SocietyKennedy v. Bremerton School District- Legal Information InstituteWest Virginia v. EPA- The Federalist SocietyNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen- Legal Information InstituteBiden v. Texas- SCOTUS BlogDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization- Legal Information InstituteDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization- SCOTUS BlogEverything You Need to Know About Dobbs v. Jackson Supreme Court CaseKetanji Brown Jackson sworn in as Supreme Court justice, replacing Stephen BreyerSupreme Court hands down climate change, immigration rulings on final day of historic termSupreme Court sides with Biden over Texas in immigration rulingPresident Biden delivers remarks on Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade — 6/24/2022House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Reacts to Supreme Court Decision Overturning Roe v. Wade
In this episode of the Duke Law Podcast, the Duke Center for Firearms Law discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen on June 23, 2022. Join Profs. Joseph Blocher and Darrell A. H. Miller – both faculty co-directors of the Center – and Jacob D. Charles and Andrew Willinger – outgoing and incoming executive directors of the Center, respectively – for a broad-ranging conversation on the implications of the Court's decision and the unanswered questions that could lead to further litigation.
On June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. In a 6-3 decision, the Court struck down New York's handgun licensing law that required New Yorkers to demonstrate a “proper cause” in order to be granted a license to carry a pistol or revolver in public. […]
On June 23, 2022, the Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. In a 6-3 decision, the Court struck down New York’s handgun licensing law that required New Yorkers to demonstrate a “proper cause” in order to be granted a license to carry a pistol or revolver in public. The petitioners, Brandon Koch and Robert Nash, were denied licenses to carry a firearm in public after listing their generalized interest in self-defense as the reason for seeking the license. New York denied their license application because a generalized interest in self-defense failed to satisfy the state’s proper cause requirement. Both men sued, claiming that New York had violated their Second Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights in doing so. A district court dismissed their claims, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed.Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court, in the first major case on firearms regulation that the Court has considered in over a decade.Please join our legal expert to discuss the case, the legal issues involved, and the implications for the future of firearm regulation in America. Featuring:Prof. Mark W. Smith, Visiting Fellow in Pharmaceutical Public Policy and Law in the Department of Pharmacology, University of Oxford; Presidential Scholar and Senior Fellow in Law and Public Policy, The King’s College; Distinguished Scholar and Senior Fellow of Law and Public Policy, Ave Maria School of Law---To register, please click the link above
Hour 1 of The Dawn Stensland Show: An off-duty police officer was killed in a car crash in Northeast Philadelphia. The officer, whose name has not yet been released to the public, was on his way home from work when his vehicle was struck by a BMW sedan. Two teens have been charged in the murder of Sean Toomey—a 15-year-old boy who was senselessly shot and killed while carrying groceries into his family's Philadelphia home. In response to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen—which struck down restrictions on concealed carry permits—New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy condemned the court, referring to the decision as “deeply flawed” and “tragic.” The U.S. Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade with its 6-3 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. In the groundbreaking decision of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, Chief Justice John Roberts voted with the court's conservative majority, writing a concurring opinion, according to The New York Times. In a leaked draft of the decision, Roberts had sided with the dissenting justices. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi spoke about the Supreme Court's decision to effectively end Roe v. Wade—calling the decision a “slap in the face” to women and “cruel.” She stated that a women's right to choose is on the ballot in November, alleging that the court's end goal is to criminalize individual “health decisions” made by women.
SIGN UP TO MAKE SURE BIGTECH CANT SHUT ME DOWN SO WE CAN STAY IN CONTACT HERE: derek-oshea-show.mailchimpsites.comSupport the SHOW https://www.buymeacoffee.com/derekosheashowWANT A MUG WITH MY FACE ON IT?https://store.streamelements.com/theoneminutenewsLIBERALS CRY dissolve the Supreme Court of the United States over New York Concealed Carry SOURCE:https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-scotus-strikes-down-new-york-concealed-carry-restrictions-restrictionsThe Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that longtime restrictions New York has placed on carrying concealed firearms violates Americans' 2nd and 14th amendment rights.The high court ruled 6-3 in favor of gun rights in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. The court heard oral arguments in the case in November, and the court's conservative majority appeared to lean toward dismissing New York's restrictions at the time. Thursday's decision is the widest expansion of gun rights in more than a decade, according to The Wall Street Journal.https://twitter.com/inespohl/status/1539989445054693376?s=20&t=b-sCNYQ0mX1frbXLvZIHYAExactly one month after an 18 year old killed 19 children in a school in Uvalde, TX, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of stripping away another gun control measure which will now allow even more access to firearms. It's just unbelievable.Keith Olbermannhttps://twitter.com/KeithOlbermann/status/1539983585406484480?s=20&t=xee1Cu75WnMz5QT-w2v4OgIt has become necessary to dissolve the Supreme Court of the United States. The first step is for a state the "court" has now forced guns upon, to ignore this ruling.Great. You're a court? Why and how do think you can enforce your rulings?https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1539994137457467393?s=20&t=qMkCIsg2-x7UAJyb0vTwOgPoppy Harlow is appalled at SCOTUS "wiping away any distinction between having a gun in your home for self-defense" and "carrying it outside of your home."Before this ruling, really only famous, well-connected, or wealthy people could get permits to conceal carry in New York.Sara Haines suggests people get shot crossing the street by the "good guy with a gun."She also doesn't seem to understand receiving training is part of the permitting process."It's a really scary prospect to walk out into the street with that"https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1539999473518231557?s=20&t=ARwhx4eKdzhZ0nL9e8VjLQhttps://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1539984678370828291?s=20&t=gze2L0axhuyQyVchsztI6gJeffery Toobin decries the Second Amendment being a "1st class right" like the freedom of speech.He also claims, without evidence, the conservative justices want people to buy guns "without background checks."Support the show
Hour 1 of The Dawn Stensland Show: A judge has dismissed third-degree murder charges against Jayana Tanae Webb—the woman accused of killing Pennsylvania State Troopers Branden Sisca and Martin Mack II in a crash on I-95. According to police, Webb's blood alcohol level was twice the legal limit when she struck, and killed, two state troopers and a pedestrian. District Attorney Larry Krasner has vowed to refile the dismissed charges. Webb, however, still faces several other charges in relation to the crash. Phillip Magness—Director of Research and Education at the American Institute for Economic Research & Author of “The 1619 Project: A Critique”—joins the show to discuss his latest editorial, “Is Twitter-Famous Princeton Historian Kevin Kruse a Plagiarist?” Recently, Dr. Magness brought several incidents of plagiarism to the attention of Princeton University involving publications made by one of their most prominent professors, Kevin Kruse. Why is Princeton ignoring these credible allegations of academic dishonesty? On Thursday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court issued rulings in two cases. In Berger v. North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, an 8-1 majority ruled that North Carolina legislators have the legal authority to defend voter identification laws. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, a 6-3 majority struck down a New York State law that restricted concealed carry permits. The Wall Street Journal referred to it as the “biggest Second Amendment case in a decade.” According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, although homicides in Philadelphia are down slightly from this time last year, shootings have actually increased by 8%—with 1,100 people having been shot.
Hour 2 of The Dawn Stensland Show: New York Governor Kathy Hochul called the Supreme Court's ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen—which struck down restrictions on concealed carry permits— “shocking.” Listeners react to the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen. What will it mean for Second Amendment rights moving forward? Several police departments in South Jersey may adopt “BolaWrap” technology to subdue suspects. The wrap does not cause any physical harm but restricts movement by tying-up suspects from the knee down. On Wednesday, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell spoke with the Senate Banking Committee. During his appearance, Powell acknowledged an interest rate increase could lead to recession and stated, despite contrasting claims from the White House, that inflation is not primarily being driven by Russia's war in Ukraine. During his speech imploring Congress to adopt a three-month gas tax holiday, President Joe Biden bizarrely blamed gas station owners for charging artificially high prices to consumers.
The state of New York requires a person to show a special need for self-protection to receive an unrestricted license to carry a concealed firearm outside the home. Robert Nash and Brandon Koch challenged the law after New York rejected their concealed-carry applications based on failure to show “proper cause.” A district court dismissed their claims, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. The case was decided on June 22, 2022. The Court held that New York's proper-cause 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. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett joined. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion. Justice Kavanaugh filed a concurring opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts joined. Justice Barrett filed a concurring opinion. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Sotomayor and Kagan joined. Credit: Oyez, LII Supreme Court Resources, Justia Supreme Court Center, available at: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2021/20-843 --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/scotus-opinions/support
The #SistersInLaw convene to lament the tragedy in Uvalde, and look at the ways legislation can be used to improve gun safety to help protect us all. Then, they revisit the 2 year anniversary of George Floyd's death, and discuss the value of police body cams and other ways we can reform law enforcement. From there, they lay out the need for grand jury hearings relating to the events of 1/6 and the many other legal risks facing Donald Trump. Get #SistersInLaw Merch For our just released ethically sourced clothes, pins and more, support the #SistersInLaw by picking up our new merch items at the Politicon Merch Store. #Sisters Show Off Their Merch Email the sisters at SISTERSINLAW@POLITICON.COM Or tweet using #SistersInLaw Content From The #Sisters: Recommended by Kimberly Atkins Stohr on the case for prosecuting Donald Trump in the Boston Globe. Articles from iGen Politics Victor Shi on getting Gen Z to the voting booth and young peoples' role in the 2022 elections WaPo article on Vanita Gupta's efforts to reform policing The Watergate Special Prosecution Force Memo From Heather Cox Richardson on the Ulvade tragedy The Supreme Court Case New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen Links To This Week's Sponsors: Hello Fresh: For up to 16 free meals and 3 free gifts, go to hellofresh.com and use the promo code: SISTERS16 Thrive Causemetics: For 15% off your first order, go to thrivecausemetics.com with promo code: QE2FY5D28CB2 Moink: For farm fresh meats and 1 year of free filet mignon, go to moinkbox.com Blueland: For 20% off your first order, go to blueland.com Smith Ai: Save $100 when take your business to the next level with smith.ai and use the promo code: SISTERS Get More From The #Sisters In Law Joyce Vance: Twitter | University of Alabama Law | MSNBC Jill Wine-Banks: Twitter | Facebook | Website | Author of The Watergate Girl: My Fight For Truth & Justice Against A Criminal President Kimberly Atkins Stohr: Twitter | Boston Globe | WBUR Barb McQuade: Twitter | University of Michigan Law | Just Security | MSNBC
McDonald v City of Chicago. On June 28, 2010, the Court in McDonald v City of Chicago, (2010), held that the Second Amendment was incorporated, saying that "t is clear that the Framers and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty." This means that the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government. It also remanded a case regarding a Chicago handgun prohibition. Four of the five justices in the majority voted to do so by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, while the fifth justice, Clarence Thomas, voted to do so through the amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause. Justice Thomas, in his concurring opinion, noted that the Privileges or Immunities Clause refers to "citizens" whereas the Due Process Clause refers more broadly to any "person", and therefore Thomas reserved the issue of non-citizens for later decision. After McDonald, many questions about the Second Amendment remain unsettled, such as whether non-citizens are protected through the Equal Protection Clause. In People v Aguilar (2013), the Illinois Supreme Court summed up the central Second Amendment findings in McDonald: Two years later, in McDonald v City of Chicago, (2010), the Supreme Court held that the second amendment right recognized in Heller is applicable to the states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. In so holding, the Court reiterated that "the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense"; that "individual self-defense is 'the central component' of the Second Amendment right" (emphasis in original)(quoting Heller); and that "self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day". Caetano v Massachusetts. On March 21, 2016, in a per curiam decision the Court vacated a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision upholding the conviction of a woman who carried a stun gun for self-defense. The Court reiterated that the Heller and McDonald decisions saying that "the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding", that "the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States", and that the protection is not restricted to "only those weapons useful in warfare". The term "bearable arms" was defined in District of Columbia v Heller, (2008) and includes any "eapo of offense" or "thing that a man wears for his defense, or takes into his hands", that is "carrying. ... for the purpose of offensive or defensive action". New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v City of New York, New York. The Court heard New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v City of New York, New York on December 2, 2019, to decide whether a New York City ordinance that prevents the transport of guns, even if properly unloaded and locked in containers, from within city limits to outside of the city limits is unconstitutional. The New York Rifle & Pistol Association challenged the ordinance on the basis of the Second Amendment, the Dormant Commerce Clause, and the right to travel. However, as the city had changed its rule to allow transport while the case was under consideration by the Court, the Court ruled the case moot in April 2020, though it remanded the case so the lower courts could review the new rules under the petitioner's new claims.
On November 3rd, the Court heard argument in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen, a case which concerned whether New York's law requiring that applicants for unrestricted concealed-carry licenses demonstrate a special need for self-defense violates the Second Amendment. Examining oral argument today, we have Professor Adam Winkler, the Connell Professor of law at the UCLA School of Law, and Professor Robert Leider of George Mason's Antonin Scalia Law School.
Ashton is joined by Brad Polumbo, a Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Freedom and a Contributor to the Washington Examiner.Ashton and Brad have a fascinating conversation on a variety of topics. First, they explore the takeaways are from the most recent elections that took place in Virginia and New Jersey and discuss whether those results foreshadow the upcoming midterm elections in November. Next, Ashton and Brad discuss what is in the multi-trillion dollar "Build Back Better" bill, which President Biden is trying to ram through Congress.Ashton and Brad next explore the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen case. Bruen is one of the most significant 2nd amendment cases to come before the Supreme Court and could potentially have far reaching consequences in estopping localities like NYC and LA from denying the right of their citizens to easily attain gun carrying permits. Ashton and Brad then analyze the issue of student loans, the false promises of certain "green" energy technologies and whether the US is headed for a national divorce.You can find Brad on twitter: @brad_polumbo and listen to his podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/based-politics/id1535704082Subscribe to Ashton Cohen: ELECTile Dysfunction Podcast on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ashton-cohen-the-electile-dysfunction-podcast/id1565208599Subscribe to Ashton Cohen: ELECTile Dysfunction Podcast on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6siXVSwM2OWz3itH90YRNA?si=v5MUMEpwTSG_sVGPOKHP8wSubscribe to Ashton's channel on Youtube: youtube.com/c/ashtoncohenFollow on Twitter: https://twitter.com/theashtoncohenFollow on TikTok: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZM8nQjHta/Follow on Instagram: instagram.com/theashtoncohenFollow on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theAshtonCohen
QUESTION PRESENTED:This case presents a clear and intractable conflict regarding an important jurisdictional qNew York prohibits its ordinary law-abiding citizens from carrying a handgun outside the home without a license, and it denies licenses to every citizen who fails to convince the state that he or she has “proper cause” to carry a firearm. In District of Columbia v. Heller, this Court held that the Second Amendment protects “the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” 554 U.S. 570, 592 (2008), and in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the Court held that this right “is fully applicable to the States,” 561 U.S. 742, 750 (2010). For more than a decade since then, numerous courts of appeals have squarely divided on this critical question: whether the Second Amendment allows the government to deprive ordinary law-abiding citizens of the right to possess and carry a handgun outside the home. This circuit split is open and acknowledged, and it is squarely presented by this petition, in which the Second Circuit affirmed the constitutionality of a New York regime that prohibits law-abiding individuals from carrying a handgun unless they first demonstrate some form of “proper cause” that distinguishes them from the body of “the people” protected by the Second Amendment. The time has come for this Court to resolve this critical constitutional impasse and reaffirm the citizens' fundamental right to carry a handgun for self-defense. The question presented is: Whether the Second Amendment allows the government to prohibit ordinary lawabiding citizens from carrying handguns outside the home for self- defense.DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)Dec 17 2020 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 22, 2021)Dec 23 2020 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al.Jan 08 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 22, 2021 to February 22, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.Jan 11 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 22, 2021.Jan 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Firearms Policy Coalition and Firearms Policy Foundation filed.Jan 22 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Korte Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a Korte Tree Care filed.Jan 22 2021 | Brief amici curiae of State of Missouri.et al. filed.Jan 22 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Law Enforcement Groups and State and Local Firearms Rights Groups filed.Feb 12 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Neal Goldfarb filed. (Brief corrected 3/1/21)Feb 22 2021 | Brief of respondents Keith M. Corlett, et al. in opposition filed.Mar 10 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/26/2021.Mar 10 2021 | Reply of petitioners New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)Mar 29 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2021.Apr 12 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/16/2021.Apr 19 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/23/2021.Apr 26 2021 | Petition GRANTED limited to the following question: Whether the State's denial of petitioners' applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.May 07 2021 | Motion for an extension of time file the briefs on the merits filed.May 11 2021 | Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including July 2, 2021. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including August 23, 2021.May 27 2021 | Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al.Jun 16 2021 | Motion for an further extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.Jun 25 2021 | Motion to further extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is further extended to and including July 13, 2021. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is further extended to and including September 14, 2021.Jul 09 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Alabama Center for Law and Liberty filed.Jul 13 2021 | Brief of petitioners New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al. filed.Jul 13 2021 | Joint appendix filed.Jul 13 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Professors of Second Amendment Law, et al. filed.Jul 14 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence filed.Jul 14 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Bay Colony Weapons Collectors, Inc. filed.Jul 15 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. filed.Jul 15 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Italo-American Jurists and Attorneys filed.Jul 16 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of National African American Gun Association, Inc. filed.Jul 16 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Mountain States Legal Foundation's Center to Keep and Bear Arms filed.Jul 16 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of George K. Young Jr. filed.Jul 19 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms filed.Jul 19 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Representative Claudia Tenney and 175 Additional Members of the U.S. House of Representatives filed.Jul 19 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of The Buckeye Institute filed.Jul 19 2021 | Brief amici curiae of The DC Project Foundation; Operation Blazing Sword—Pink Pistols; Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership filed.Jul 19 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Patrick J. Charles in support of neither party filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of J. Joel Alicea filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Black Attorneys of Legal Aid, et al. filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of American Constitutional Rights Union filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of National Shooting Sports Foundation Inc. filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of The Independent Institute filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of State of Arizona, et al. filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Governor of Texas filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Law Enforcement Groups and State and Local Firearms Rights Groups filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of American Center for Law and Justice filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of The Liberal Gun Club and Commonwealth Second Amendment filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of California Rifle & Pistol Association, Incorporated and Second Amendment Law Center, Inc filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Gun Owners of America, Inc., Gun Owners Foundation, and Heller Foundation filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of William English, Ph.D. and The Center for Human Liberty filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Second Amendment Foundation, et al. filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Lambert Henry, Russell Davenport, and Peter Fusco filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Center for Defense of Free Enterprise, et al. filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of The Cato Institute filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of The League for Sportsmen, Law Enforcement and Defense filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of United States Senator Ted Cruz, and 24 Other U.S. Senators filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of National Foundation for Gun Rights and National Association for Gun Rights filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Black Guns Matter, et al. filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Professors Robert Leider and Nelson Lund, and the Buckeye Firearms Association filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Asian Pacific American Gun Owners Association filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of FPC American Victory Fund, et al. filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Madison Society Foundation, Inc. filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of The Rutherford Institute filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of The Goldwater Institute filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of The Firearms Policy Coalition and Professor Joyce Lee Malcolm filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Independent Women's Law Center filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of California Gun Rights Foundation filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Second Amendment Law Professors in support of neither party filed.Jul 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Crime Prevention Research Center filed.Aug 16 2021 | ARGUMENT SET FOR Wednesday, November 3, 2021.Sep 01 2021 | Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit.Sep 01 2021 | The record from the U.S.C.A. 2nd Circuit has been electronically filed.Sep 01 2021 | The record from the U.S.D.C. Northern District of New York has been electronically filed.Sep 13 2021 | Brief amici curiae of J. Michael Luttig, et al. filed.Sep 14 2021 | Brief of Kevin P. Bruen, et al. not accepted for filing. (September 15, 2021)Sep 14 2021 | Brief of respondents Kevin P. Bruen, et al. filed.Sep 14 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Neal Goldfarb filed.Sep 20 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of League of Women Voters filed. (Distributed)Sep 20 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Amnesty International USA, et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | CIRCULATEDSep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument filed.Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Everytown for Gun Safety filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of States of California, et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of American Civil Liberties Union and New York Civil Liberties Union filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Violence Policy Center filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Former Major City Police Chiefs filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Americans Against Gun Violence filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of United States Senators Charles E. Schumer, et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. and National Urban League filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of City of New York filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of American Medical Association, et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Professors of History and Law filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of New York County Lawyers Association filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Former National Security Officials filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of March For Our Lives Action Fund filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Brady filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of City of Chicago and Eleven Other Cities filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Citizens Crime Commission of New York City filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Members of the Business Community filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of The Partnership for New York City filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Corpus Linguistics Professors and Experts filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Presiding Bishop and President of the House of Deputies of the Episcopal Church, et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of John Elson filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of National League of Cities, et al. filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Amicus brief of The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence and 35 Other Organizations not accepted for filing. (September 29, 2021 - Corrected version submitted).Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence and 35 Other Organizations filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amici curiae of Social Scientists and Public Health Researchers in Support of Respondents filed. (Distributed)Sep 21 2021 | Amicus brief of Prosecutors Against Gun Violence not accepted for filing. (Compliant PDF version submitted October 25, 2021)Sep 21 2021 | Brief amicus curiae of Prosecutors Against Gun Violence filed. (Distributed)Sep 23 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici brief out of time filed by Criminal Legal Scholars.Oct 12 2021 | Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae, for divided argument, and for enlargement of time for oral argument GRANTED.Oct 12 2021 | Motion for leave to file amici brief out of time filed by Criminal Legal Scholars GRANTED.Oct 14 2021 | Reply of petitioners New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)Oct 18 2021 | The time for oral argument is allotted as follows: 35 minutes for petitioners, 20 minutes for respondents, and 15 minutes for the Acting Solicitor General.Nov 03 2021 | Argued. For petitioners: Paul D. Clement, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Barbara D. Underwood, Solicitor General, New York, N. Y.; and Brian H. Fletcher, Principal Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★
With the battle over abortion rights in the spotlight, another Supreme Court case is flying under the radar, and it could impact the interpretation of the Second Amendment for about 80 million Americans. Oral arguments in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen got underway Thursday. Saint Joseph's University political science professor Dr. Susan Liebell explains the factors at play in a potentially high-stakes suit. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
The Supreme Court is back in session with a full plate this fall. To breakdown the latest national security cases on the docket, co-host Yvette is joined by Jamil Jaffer, Founder & Executive Director of the National Security Institute at George Mason University. Together they cover the big ticket issues, from United States v. Zubaydah and the state secrets privilege, to New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and 2nd Amendment rights. Jamil Jaffer is the Founder & Executive Director of the National Security Institute at George Mason University: https://www.law.gmu.edu/faculty/directory/fulltime/jaffer_jamil_n References: United States v. Zubaydah: https://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/20-00827qp.pdf FBI v. Fazaga: https://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/20-00828qp.pdf Patel v. Garland: https://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/20-00979qp.pdf U.S. v. Tsarnaev: https://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/20-00443qp.pdf Babcock v. Kijakazi: https://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/20-00480qp.pdf New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen: https://www.supremecourt.gov/qp/20-00843qp.pdf
In Episode 226 of District of Conservation, Gabriella welcomes back The Reload's Stephen Gutowski to discuss the results from Virginia's statewide elections and gun control's defeat in Old Dominion. Plus, Stephen previews the forthcoming NYSRPA v. Bruen case before the Supreme Court and whether or not may-issue will be struck down nationally. SHOW NOTES Gun Control in Virginia Dealt Heavy Blow as Voters Turn to Republicans Pro-gun Republican wins in Hampton Roads VCDL opposes Dominion Energy WaPo Op-Ed: The Supreme Court is poised to make us all live under Texas' gun laws Reload report on SCOTUS New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen Stephen on Entertainment Tonight Follow Stephen on Instagram and Twitter. Subscribe to The Reload and follow them on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/district-of-conservation/support
A case in which the Court will decide whether New York's denial of petitioners' applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.
On November 3, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in New York State Rifle in Pistol Association Inc. V. Bruen. The case was brought by two men who were denied New York concealed carry permits along with New York's National Rifle Association affiliate against the superintendent of the New York State Police, Kevin Bruen. The lawsuit challenges New York's practice of only giving concealed carry permits—which allow owners to carry guns in public in a concealed manner—to those who can show that they have a special need to defend themselves. On this week's episode, host Jeffrey Rosen is joined by two legal scholars who filed briefs on opposing sides of the case—Judge J. Michael Luttig who filed in support of Bruen, and David Kopel who filed in support of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association. They detail the arguments they made in their briefs as well as what's at stake in this case, and debate whether text, history, and tradition do or do not support striking down the New York law. Additional resources and transcripts available at constitutioncenter.org/constitution. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.
On November 3, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in New York State Rifle in Pistol Association Inc. V. Bruen. The case was brought by two men who were denied New York concealed carry permits along with New York's National Rifle Association affiliate against the superintendent of the New York State Police, Kevin Bruen. The lawsuit challenges New York's practice of only giving concealed carry permits—which allow owners to carry guns in public in a concealed manner—to those who can show that they have a special need to defend themselves. On this week's episode, host Jeffrey Rosen is joined by two legal scholars who filed briefs on opposing sides of the case—Judge J. Michael Luttig who filed in support of Bruen, and David Kopel who filed in support of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association. They detail the arguments they made in their briefs as well as what's at stake in this case, and debate whether text, history, and tradition do or do not support striking down the New York law. Additional resources and transcripts available at constitutioncenter.org/constitution. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.
When the Supreme Court handed down its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller overturning provisions of DC's gun licensing laws, it set off a wave of legal challenges, policy fights, and legislation across the country. Join prominent legal scholars of the Second Amendment for this interactive conversation as they discuss the Heller ruling and the subsequent legal and legislative fights and provide an overview of where things stand today. This conversation is all the timelier, as the Supreme Court will consider a major new Second Amendment case in the coming term, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
The Supreme Court returns October 4th for its 2021-2022 Term, and the justices will hear cases on a number of important issues: abortion, the 2nd Amendment, religious liberty, disability discrimination, national security, and more. For instance, in Dobbs v. Jackson's Women's Health Organization, the Court will determine whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, the Court will decide whether New York's restrictive firearm licensing violates the 2nd Amendment. In Carsen v. Makin, the Court will determine whether the state violates the 1st or 14th Amendments if it excludes religious schools from otherwise generally available student aid because the school offers religious instruction. In CVS Pharmacy Inc. v. Doe, the Court will decide whether a facially neutral policy that results in disparate impact for certain disabled groups violates the ACA and Rehabilitation Act's anti-discrimination clauses. In United States v. Zubaydah, the Court will decide whether the 9th Circuit erred by allowing discovery of documents the government claims are covered by the state-secrets privilege. Please join us for a thoughtful discussion with two distinguished Supreme Court litigators about what is likely to unfold in the next Supreme Court term. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.
This week’s episode previews New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett, which could become a major Second Amendment and gun rights case. This lawsuit was brought by two New York state residents who were denied licenses to carry firearms outside of the home, AKA “concealed carry” permits, because they had failed to show "proper cause" to carry a firearm in public for the purpose of self-defense and did not demonstrate a special need for self-defense that distinguished them from the general public. Host Jeffrey Rosen was joined by Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America, and Clark Neily, who was co-counsel in the major gun rights case District of Columbia v. Heller, to explore the case, debate whether New York’s controversial concealed carry law is constitutional, examine the surprising history of similar laws, and more. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Additional resources and transcript available at constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/media-library.
This week’s episode previews New York State Rifle and Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett, which could become a major Second Amendment and gun rights case. This lawsuit was brought by two New York state residents who were denied licenses to carry firearms outside of the home, AKA “concealed carry” permits, because they had failed to show "proper cause" to carry a firearm in public for the purpose of self-defense and did not demonstrate a special need for self-defense that distinguished them from the general public. Host Jeffrey Rosen was joined by Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America, and Clark Neily, who was co-counsel in the major gun rights case District of Columbia v. Heller, to explore the case, debate whether New York’s controversial concealed carry law is constitutional, examine the surprising history of similar laws, and more. Questions or comments about the show? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org. Additional resources and transcript available at constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/media-library.
Buckle up, AO fans. There is a lot to cover on the Supreme Court front and David and Sarah talk about all of it on today’s episode. It starts with a definitive breakdown of the new Supreme Court portrait, then goes from a case that the Supreme Court will hear regarding the Second Amendment, to a case having to do with Guantanamo Bay, ending with the big First Amendment case being argued today. Plus, Sarah and David discuss the Netflix documentary about the college admissions scandal, Operation Varsity Blues, and why it’s damaging to tell kids that what college they attend is the most important factor in determining their success. Show Notes: -New SCOTUS Portrait -Chief Justice Roberts talking to Justice Kagan Portrait -Jones v. Mississippi case -Texas v. California case -New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett -SCOTUSblog page on Guantanamo Bay case -SCOTUSblog page on Houston Community College System v. Wilson -SCOTUSblog page on Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta -Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta oral arguments -Operation Varsity Blues on Netflix -Sarah’s favorite Onion article See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
I'm joined by Erin Murphy and Amy Swearer to discuss our Second Amendment rights and the current attacks on our rights. Do so-called gun control regulations have a greater impact on a woman's right to self-defense? Erin Murphy is a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of Kirkland & Ellis LLP. Her practice focuses on Supreme Court, appellate, and constitutional litigation. She has argued before both the Supreme Court and most of the federal courts of appeals on a wide variety of issues, including the scope of the First Amendment, the Takings Clause, the Federal Power Act, the Appointments Clause, and the National Labor Relations Act. Erin has also argued several appeals defending Second Amendment rights, including the appeal that produced the opinion the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York. Erin has been recognized by the National Law Journal as one of the nation’s “Outstanding Women Lawyers” and a “Rising Star” and has been ranked by Chambers & Partners as one of the nation’s top appellate lawyers. Amy Swearer is a legal fellow in the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. MENTIONED: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opin... ---------- Follow Gayle Trotter-- WEBSITE: https://gayletrotter.com TWITTER: https://twitter.com/gayletrotter PARLER: @gayletrotter FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/gayle.s.trotter INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/gayle_trotter/ SOUNDCLOUD: https://soundcloud.com/gayle-trotter Support: https://www.patreon.com/gayletrotter You can also listen to The Gayle Trotter Show on Spotify, iHeart Radio, Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, Google Play, TuneIn, Stitcher and other podcast platforms.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
