MAJOR BREAKING 2A NEWS: DOJ FILES TERRIBLE REPLY BRIEF TO SCOTUS...

Published on October 28, 2023
Duration: 18:56

This video analyzes the Department of Justice's reply brief in the US v. Rahimi case before the Supreme Court. The speaker, Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney, argues that the DOJ is attempting to undermine Second Amendment protections by misinterpreting 'the people' and misapplying historical legal analysis. He highlights the low enforcement numbers for certain federal gun control statutes, suggesting they are used for political rather than public safety reasons.

Quick Summary

The DOJ's reply brief in US v. Rahimi argues that 'the people' in the Second Amendment refers only to law-abiding citizens. Constitutional attorney Mark Smith refutes this, highlighting that historical legal analysis is only relevant if it confirms the 1791 understanding, not narrows it, and points to low enforcement statistics for federal gun control laws.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Breaking 2A News: DOJ Reply Brief to SCOTUS
  2. 00:31Introduction: Mark Smith, Constitutional Attorney
  3. 00:46US v. Rahimi Case Overview
  4. 01:35Statute at Issue: 18 USC 922 G8
  5. 02:17Merrick Garland's Strategy
  6. 03:34DOJ's First Argument: Redefining 'The People'
  7. 06:54DOJ's Second Argument: Historical Analogs
  8. 10:53Conflating Concepts: 1791 vs. Late 19th Century
  9. 12:29DOJ Criticizes Fifth Circuit Decision
  10. 13:02Using Proposed, Unenacted Laws
  11. 14:45DOJ's 'Parade of Horribles' Argument
  12. 15:16Enforcement Statistics Analysis
  13. 18:21Conclusion: Rahimi Case's True Purpose

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core argument of the DOJ's reply brief in the US v. Rahimi case?

The DOJ's reply brief argues that the Second Amendment's protections apply only to law-abiding and responsible citizens, attempting to justify the prohibition of firearm possession for individuals subject to domestic violence restraining orders.

How does the DOJ attempt to use historical legal analysis in the Rahimi case?

The DOJ tries to use late 19th-century historical analogs to justify gun control laws. However, the speaker argues this is only valid if the history confirms the 1791 understanding, not if it narrows it, citing Supreme Court precedent.

What are the enforcement statistics for federal gun control laws mentioned in the video?

The video cites low annual conviction numbers for federal statutes like 18 USC 922 G8 (10-45), G4 (6-16), and G3 (105-146), suggesting these laws are not heavily enforced and may not be critical to public safety.

Why is the DOJ's use of proposed laws in the Rahimi brief criticized?

The DOJ is criticized for citing proposed laws from ratification conventions that were never enacted. The speaker argues these are irrelevant for interpreting the Constitution, as they were rejected by the people and the Supreme Court has deemed such proposals of 'dubious quality'.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from The Four Boxes Diner

View all →