HUGE 2A SCOTUS DEVELOPMENT: AG GARLAND/ DOJ GUN MISSTEP STARTING TO PAY OFF FOR 2A ALREADY

Published on October 20, 2023
Duration: 17:57

This video discusses a significant development regarding the Second Amendment before the US Supreme Court. The attorneys for Brian Rigney have agreed to have his case heard alongside the Rahimi case, challenging the constitutionality of 18 USC 922 G1, which prohibits firearm possession by felons. The speaker argues that Attorney General Merrick Garland's strategic focus on the Rahimi case (18 USC 922 G8) over the Rigney case may backfire, as the Rigney case presents more favorable facts for Second Amendment proponents, particularly concerning non-violent offenders.

Quick Summary

The Supreme Court is considering the Brian Rigney case, challenging 18 USC 922 G1, which prohibits firearm possession by felons. Rigney's non-violent misdemeanor conviction makes his case a potentially stronger vehicle for Second Amendment arguments than the Rahimi case, which Attorney General Merrick Garland prioritized. Key legal arguments for hearing Rigney's case include a Third Circuit ruling, a circuit split, and the fundamental nature of Second Amendment rights.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Major SCOTUS Development: Rigney Case
  2. 00:12Rigney Case Agreed for Supreme Court Hearing
  3. 00:20Constitutionality of 18 USC 922 G1
  4. 00:31Second Amendment Case Alongside Rahimi
  5. 00:49Host Mark Smith Introduction
  6. 01:04Breaking News: Rigney Case Reply Brief
  7. 01:22The Rahimi Case Details
  8. 01:4818 USC 922 G8 Explained
  9. 02:18The Rigney Case Facts
  10. 02:29Brian Rigney's Misdemeanor Conviction
  11. 03:09Felon Status Under Federal Statute
  12. 03:30Merrick Garland's Strategy
  13. 04:17Prediction on Garland's Strategy
  14. 04:40Rigney Lawyers Agree to Certiorari
  15. 04:56Arguments for Hearing Multiple Cases
  16. 05:30Comparison: 922 G8 vs. 922 G1 Convictions
  17. 06:34922 G1 Felon Possession Statute
  18. 07:08Contrast: Rahimi vs. Rigney Defendants
  19. 08:00Garland's Focus on Destroying Second Amendment
  20. 08:32Curveball: The Rigney Case
  21. 08:47Rigney Case Question Presented
  22. 09:07Unconstitutionality as Applied to Rigney
  23. 09:20Martha Stewart Comparison
  24. 09:44Argument for Granting Certiorari
  25. 10:03Significance of Granting Rigney Cert
  26. 10:42Amy Coney Barrett's Role
  27. 10:53Kaner v. Barr Dissent
  28. 11:35Bruin Methodology Explained
  29. 12:31Rigney Case Similar to Kaner v. Barr
  30. 13:00Prediction: Amy Coney Barrett Opinion
  31. 13:24Rigney Lawyers' Critical Argument
  32. 13:34Rigney Brief on Page 32
  33. 14:23Multiple Cases Per Term Argument
  34. 14:32Court Hearing Multiple Cases
  35. 15:03Four Reasons to Hear Rigney Case
  36. 15:09Third Circuit Ruling for Rigney
  37. 15:53Circuit Split on Non-Violent Felons
  38. 16:18Fundamental Constitutional Right
  39. 16:28Thousands of 922 G1 Prosecutions
  40. 17:0118 USC 922 G1 Constitutionality
  41. 17:14Conclusion and Next Steps
  42. 17:29Subscribe and Follow

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the significance of the Brian Rigney case for Second Amendment rights?

The Brian Rigney case challenges 18 USC 922 G1, which prohibits firearm possession by felons. Rigney's conviction was for a non-violent misdemeanor, and his case presents a more favorable argument for Second Amendment proponents than the Rahimi case, potentially impacting how non-violent offenders' gun rights are treated.

Why did Attorney General Merrick Garland focus on the Rahimi case over the Rigney case?

The speaker suggests Merrick Garland strategically prioritized the Rahimi case (18 USC 922 G8) because Zackey Rahimi is perceived as a less sympathetic defendant. This strategy aimed to advance a gun control agenda by avoiding a case with facts more favorable to Second Amendment rights, like Rigney's non-violent conviction.

What are the key legal arguments for the Supreme Court to hear the Rigney case?

Key arguments include the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruling 18 USC 922 G1 unconstitutional as applied to Rigney, a circuit split on non-violent felon gun rights, the fundamental nature of the Second Amendment, and the significant number of prosecutions under 18 USC 922 G1, impacting thousands annually.

How might Amy Coney Barrett influence the Rigney case at the Supreme Court?

Amy Coney Barrett previously dissented in *Kaner v. Barr*, arguing that non-violent felons retain Second Amendment rights. This stance suggests she may be sympathetic to Rigney's argument, and the speaker speculates she might even write the majority opinion if the case is decided in Rigney's favor.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from The Four Boxes Diner

View all →