Videos tagged with Taxation of Rights

This video discusses the critical legislative moment for the Short Act and the Hearing Protection Act, emphasizing the need for public engagement. Senator Roger Marshall indicates a greater than 50% chance of the Short Act being included in a larger bill, provided citizens actively contact their representatives. The discussion highlights that these acts aim to remove unconstitutional taxes on firearms and accessories, with GOA providing key access and information.

This video provides an expert legal analysis of a lawsuit challenging California's AB 28, an 11% tax on firearms and ammunition. The speaker, an expert in firearms law, details the legal standing requirements, the reasons for filing in state court due to the Tax Anti-Injunction Act, and the core arguments that the tax violates the Second Amendment by singling out protected rights for taxation without historical analogues, citing key Supreme Court precedents. Support for the involved organizations is encouraged.

A lawsuit has been filed challenging California's new 11% excise tax on firearms and ammunition. The lawsuit, brought by organizations like the CRPA, 2AF, and FPC, argues the tax is unconstitutional under Second Amendment grounds, citing the Supreme Court's decisions in NYSRPA v. Bruen and Rahimi. The plaintiffs contend that taxing a constitutional right, especially to the point of making it unaffordable for some, violates established legal precedent.

This video analyzes New Jersey's proposed legislation requiring liability insurance for carrying firearms. Constitutional attorney Mark Smith argues this mandate is unconstitutional, citing a lack of historical precedent, its nature as a tax on a constitutional right, and potential issues with insurance availability. The analysis draws parallels to Supreme Court rulings like NYSRPA v. Bruen and Harper v. Board of Elections.

This video provides a high-level overview of the legal challenges facing the National Firearms Act (NFA) in the wake of the Bruin Supreme Court decision. It discusses the argument that the NFA is unconstitutional due to its reliance on a 'means-end scrutiny' test, which was re-evaluated in Bruin. The speaker also touches on the historical context of the NFA and its taxation-based justification, drawing parallels to the Obamacare ruling.

This video critiques proposed firearm insurance and fees, arguing they violate the Second Amendment by creating financial barriers to a constitutional right. The speaker contends that such measures disproportionately harm lower-income individuals who need self-defense the most, likening it to imposing costly emissions standards on essential vehicles. The core argument is that the government's role is to protect rights, not mandate safety through financial burdens that infringe upon those rights.

The Tacoma City Council has passed a resolution imposing new taxes on firearms and ammunition. This includes a $25 tax on firearm purchases and per-round taxes on ammunition (2 cents for .22 caliber and smaller, 5 cents for larger calibers). The speaker argues this is unconstitutional, violating both federal and state rights, despite a Washington State Supreme Court ruling in 2017 upholding such local taxes. The new tax is set to take effect in July 2020.