Videos tagged with Felon Firearm Possession

This video analyzes the US Supreme Court's recent order list, focusing on denied cert petitions related to Second Amendment cases. The speaker, a constitutional attorney, explains the implications of the Court's decision to send 922g cases back to lower courts in light of the Rahimi ruling, emphasizing the strategic importance of focusing on non-criminal plaintiffs. The denial of cert for Illinois' 'assault weapon' ban cases is attributed to their interlocutory nature, contrasting with the Trump immunity case. Future Second Amendment litigation is predicted, with the Reese case concerning 18-20 year olds highlighted as a likely candidate for the Supreme Court.

William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, provides an expert analysis of a federal judge's ruling in Illinois that found 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1) unconstitutional. The ruling, based on the Supreme Court's Bruen decision, determined that the federal statute prohibiting felons from possessing firearms lacks a sufficient historical analog. Kirk discusses the court's inquiry framework and the implications for future cases involving firearm restrictions.

This video details the legal landscape surrounding Second Amendment rights following the Supreme Court's Bruin decision. It highlights how lower courts are interpreting and challenging existing federal and state gun laws, particularly concerning individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders, those with non-violent felony convictions, and individuals under 21. The analysis focuses on the historical tradition test established by Bruin and the ongoing legal battles that could reshape gun control in the United States.

This video discusses the ineffectiveness of gun control laws in preventing criminals from obtaining firearms. The speaker, identifying as a violent felon, asserts that despite legal prohibitions, acquiring a firearm remains easy, particularly through avenues like gun shows in some states that bypass background checks. The core argument questions what specific laws can deter individuals already inclined to break the law from acquiring guns.

The Supreme Court's Bruin decision has significantly altered the landscape of firearm regulation in the US. Lower courts are now required to assess gun laws based on historical tradition, leading to conflicting rulings and challenges to existing federal and state restrictions. This includes laws concerning domestic violence offenders, felons, individuals under indictment, and the sale of ghost guns.

This video discusses a federal judge's interpretation of the Supreme Court's Bruen decision, specifically Judge Carlton Reeves' order in the case of United States v. Jesse Bullock. The judge questions the practicality of applying the 'text, history, and tradition' test to Second Amendment cases, suggesting the need for historians to assist judges in interpreting historical evidence related to firearm regulation. The commentary expresses concern that this approach could undermine the Bruen decision by allowing subjective historical interpretations to override established legal precedent.

This video provides a comprehensive overview of Alaska's gun laws, analyzing its constitutional protections, ownership restrictions, acquisition processes, ammunition controls, carry regulations, and self-defense statutes. While Alaska's constitution includes a right to bear arms, judicial interpretation has limited its scope. The state generally lacks firearm registration, licensing, and waiting periods, but prohibits certain individuals, like felons and those under 18, from possessing firearms. Notably, Alaska bans NFA items like machine guns and suppressors, though possession compliant with federal law serves as an affirmative defense. The state has a 'stand your ground' law and allows permitless concealed carry for those 21 and older.

The Supreme Court is considering the case of Roundtree v. Garland, which questions whether non-violent felons retain Second Amendment rights. The case involves an individual convicted of a non-violent felony (failure to pay child support) who was later found in possession of a firearm. The core issue is whether such individuals can bring an 'as applied' challenge to state laws permanently disarming felons, and if courts must analyze the specific felony and individual circumstances.