Videos tagged with Federal Appeals Court

The Ninth Circuit ruled California's per-purchase ammunition background check system unconstitutional, finding it infringes on the Second Amendment right to keep arms operable. However, the ruling is stayed pending California's request for rehearing, meaning current checks remain in effect. The decision did not affect bans on large-capacity magazines or federal prohibitions on ammunition possession by prohibited persons.

This video analyzes the DOJ's decision to decline Supreme Court review in Reese v. ATF. This means a federal appeals court ruling allowing 18- to 20-year-olds to purchase handguns from licensed dealers in certain states will stand. The content will break down the implications of this ruling for young adults, its impact on current handgun purchase laws, and potential future legal developments. It will also identify affected states, clarify the court's decision, and discuss how this could influence federal gun regulations. The video is aimed at young adults, firearms dealers, and anyone interested in this significant legal development.

A federal appeals court has ruled California's ammunition background check law unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-to-1 decision in Road v. Bont, found the law, Proposition 63, to be an infringement on the right to keep and bear arms. The court applied the Bruen methodology, focusing on the text of the Second Amendment and historical analysis, concluding that ammunition is an 'arm' and the right to acquire it is protected.

This video provides an expert analysis of a federal appeals court ruling that upholds National Firearms Act (NFA) regulations on short-barreled rifles (SBRs), specifically in the case of Jamond Rush vs. United States of America. The ruling relies on the precedent set by US v. Miller and interprets the Second Amendment in light of the Bruen decision, concluding that SBRs are not protected as they are not in common use for lawful purposes. The speaker, an expert in firearms law and advocacy, warns that lower courts may continue to rely on older precedents and emphasizes the ongoing fight for gun rights.

This video discusses the recent changes to gun show sales regulations, specifically the requirement for all firearm sales at gun shows to be conducted by FFL dealers, necessitating NICS background checks. It explores the potential impact of these new rules following the upcoming election and inauguration, considering state-by-state variations and the discretion of the new administration.

A federal appeals court upheld the District of Columbia's ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds in Hansen v. District of Columbia. While the majority ruled against the Second Amendment, the dissent by Judge Justin Walker, citing Mark Smith's scholarship, argued that such magazines are in common use and protected. The decision's analysis of historical analogues and the 'in common use' test has implications for future Second Amendment cases, including the upcoming Snope case.

Federal judges are questioning the constitutionality of Florida's law restricting firearm purchases for individuals aged 18-20. The court is examining how the Supreme Court's Bruen decision, requiring historical tradition for gun laws, applies to these age-based bans. Judges highlighted the inconsistency of allowing 18-year-olds to enlist in the military or enter contracts while denying them the right to purchase firearms.

This video analyzes a significant ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit regarding federal gun control statute 18 USC 922g1. Constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith breaks down the court's decision, which determined the statute should not apply to a non-violent felon. The analysis covers the constitutional questions surrounding 'The People,' 'Arms' (not limited to just guns), the definition of 'Felonies,' and who bears the burden of proof in such cases. The content is presented from the perspective of The Four Boxes Diner, a platform focused on Second Amendment news and analysis.

This video analyzes a federal appeals court hearing on Delaware's 'assault weapon' and magazine ban. Host Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney, breaks down the legal arguments, focusing on the procedural aspects of preliminary injunctions and the substantive Second Amendment claims. He highlights the 'in common use' test and critiques the arguments presented by the state, drawing parallels to Supreme Court precedents like Heller and Bruin.

This video discusses the legal and political ramifications of Texas's Senate Bill 4 (SB4), which would allow state and local law enforcement to arrest and deport individuals suspected of crossing the border illegally. The content highlights the ongoing legal battles, including intervention by the US Supreme Court and federal appeals courts, and explores arguments concerning states' rights versus federal authority in immigration enforcement. It also touches upon potential impacts on US-Mexico relations and civil liberties.

This video analyzes a Second Amendment news development where the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has decided to hear the Bianchi v. Brown MD "assault weapon" ban case en banc. Host Mark Smith of Four Boxes Diner expresses disappointment, stating this maneuver likely thwarts a favorable ruling for 2A rights from the previous three-judge panel. Smith, a constitutional attorney and frequent media commentator, draws parallels to his previous predictions about judicial tactics and emphasizes the importance of understanding the 'four boxes' of American liberty to defend rights.

This video from Guns & Gadgets discusses a recent federal appeals court ruling that AR-15 style rifles, termed 'assault weapons,' are not protected by the Second Amendment. The ruling by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned an injunction against Illinois' assault weapon and magazine ban, with a 2-1 decision. This creates a circuit split with previous rulings, such as Judge Roger T. Benitez's decision in California, highlighting the ongoing legal battles over firearm rights. The speaker criticizes the judges' reasoning and urges viewers to contact legislators.