Videos tagged with Amicus Brief

The US v. Peterson case challenges the NFA's suppressor restrictions, arguing it violates the Second Amendment. The Fifth Circuit upheld the NFA by likening it to a 'shall issue' licensing regime, a reasoning now being contested. The Supreme Court is considering the case, with amicus briefs filed urging review, and the DOJ has waived its right to respond, creating procedural uncertainty.

The DC Court of Appeals ruled that DC's ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds violates the Second Amendment. This ruling has been challenged by 18 states and gun control groups who have filed amicus briefs urging a rehearing. These groups argue the ruling's 'common use' analysis is flawed and could impact other firearm regulations nationwide.

This video discusses a legal argument concerning the disarming of broad classes of people. The core of the argument, presented in an amicus brief, is that when disarming individuals deemed dangerous, the definition of 'dangerousness' must correspond to historical categories. Otherwise, governments could arbitrarily disarm individuals based on conduct protected by other constitutional rights.

This video analyzes an amicus brief filed by 18 states in support of the District of Columbia's magazine ban in the Benson v. United States case. The speaker, William Kirk, argues that the brief contains fabricated legal arguments and distorts the Bruin test, particularly regarding the 'common use' standard for firearms and accessories. The analysis highlights the states' attempts to equate large capacity magazines with machine guns and their efforts to reintroduce balancing tests into Second Amendment jurisprudence.

This video discusses the Benson case, where a court struck down DC's ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds. It details the subsequent legal battles, including DC's attempt to block the ruling and the filing of an amicus brief by 18 states seeking to overturn the decision due to concerns about their own state-level magazine bans. The analysis highlights the legal arguments presented by both sides regarding the interpretation of the Second Amendment and historical precedents for firearm regulation.

This ARFCOM News segment discusses the 8th Circuit Court's decision to overturn the US v. Brad Wendt machine gun conviction, potentially making machine guns 'great again' by challenging the application of certain statutes. It also critically examines high-pressure ammunition claims and explores a controversial Oregon initiative to ban hunting and fishing. The video features an authoritative speaker with deep knowledge of firearms law and ballistics.

This video details the U.S. v. Chief Brad Wendt case, where Palmetto State Armory filed an amicus brief supporting the former Iowa Police Chief. The case challenges the ATF's expansive interpretation of the 1986 Machine Gun Ban, arguing that unelected bureaucrats cannot unilaterally expand criminal law beyond congressional intent. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Wendt's conviction, affirming that the statute, as applied, failed constitutional scrutiny and that the ATF must pursue legislative changes through Congress, not enforcement actions.

This video discusses the Supreme Court oral arguments in United States v. Hmani, focusing on the potential impact on Second Amendment rights. It highlights the core issue: whether the federal government can ban individuals from owning firearms based on their status as admitted marijuana users, and the precedent this could set. The discussion emphasizes the importance of the Bruen test, requiring historical analogs for firearm restrictions, and the potential ramifications if broad categories of people are disarmed without such justification.

This video from Gun Owners of America (GOA) provides an expert analysis of two critical Supreme Court cases: United States v. Hemani and United States v. Rahimi. It details how these cases intersect firearm ownership with controlled substance use and domestic violence restraining orders, respectively. The analysis highlights the DOJ's strategy to potentially narrow Second Amendment protections established by the Bruen decision and emphasizes GOA's role in filing amicus briefs to support gun rights.

This video, presented by William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, delves into the critical intersection of Second Amendment rights and privacy. Kirk meticulously analyzes the Hall v. Sig Sauer, Inc. case, highlighting the legal battle over gun owner data and the implications of privacy derived from constitutional amendments. The discussion emphasizes the importance of protecting gun ownership information from potential government overreach, referencing key legal precedents like the Firearms Owners Protection Act.

This video discusses the significant impact of the DOJ's amicus brief in a Second Amendment case, highlighting it as a 'gold star' that signals federal recognition of the wrongfulness of laws suppressing Second Amendment rights. The discussion also covers the coordination of 25 states opposing ammunition background checks and the concept of 'legislative animus' as a driver for restrictive gun laws, particularly in California.

This video discusses significant legal support for a challenge against California's ammunition background check law. Over 24 states have filed amicus briefs, and notably, the federal Department of Justice (DOJ) has also submitted a brief supporting the challenge. The DOJ's brief argues that California's regime is unconstitutional, hindering Second Amendment rights without historical precedent.